Two summary judgments handed down Aug. 5 in Rob Hubbard’s lawsuit against Lincoln County excused two defendants due to legal immunity. 

Joe Cik, deputy county attorney for Lincoln County, was protected from Hubbard’s claims under the doctrine of prosecutorial immunity. Jay Sheffield, Libby justice of the peace, was protected under judicial immunity. 

Hubbard is suing several of Lincoln County’s law enforcement officers and government workers in a conspiracy charge, claiming his rights were violated in multiple interactions with police and courts.

U.S. Magistrate Jeremiah C. Lynch in Missoula handed down the decision.

The lawsuit continues against multiple other defendants, including Lincoln County Sheriff Roby Bowe, former deputies Travis Smith and Scott Rebo, former county deputy Roger Guches and others. Hubbard took a shotgun approach, naming many he thought had acted illegally in prosecuting him.

The summary judgments releasing Cik and Sheffield from culpability weren’t a surprise to either party, according to the lead litigants.

“Really it was expected,” Hubbard said. “The bottom line is judges and prosecutors are allowed to do whatever they want, and with good reason. I agree with the law, I just think this is an exception.”

Hubbard, who has no formal legal training and is representing himself in the trial, took issue with tactics Cik used in prosecuting Hubbard for a partner-family assault charge dating to March 20, 2011. Hubbard ultimately beat the charge, but has said there was a conspiracy seeking to punish him. 

This is reflected in Lynch’s ruling, when Hubbard’s two oldest children cite possible foul play in their affidavits.

“Christian and Shayna each suggest in their affidavits that when Cik was preparing them for trial, he told them to falsely testify at Hubbard’s family member assault trial that Christian was the victim, not the aggressor,” Lynch wrote. 

This falls well under the umbrella of prosecutorial immunity, Lynch ruled. Greg Bonilla, head attorney for the Montana Association of Counties, agreed.

“We’re very pleased with the ruling,” he said. “There just wasn’t anything on the record supporting Hubbard’s claims.”

Much of the evidence Hubbard brought against Cik wasn’t up to snuff. One of the claims was a third-party accusation of Cik calling Hubbard a “child abuser.” 

“This testimonial evidence, however, constitutes hearsay statements made by third parties,” Lynch wrote. “Hubbard does not present any further argument, and he does not identify any other evidence, in support of any other legal claims pled against Cik.”

Evidence against Sheffield was minimal at best. 

Hubbard said this was another expected turn.

“I had the weakest evidence against Sheffield,” he said. “I think Cik got roped into this whole thing. Much of what they say is hearsay is not hearsay.”

Hubbard said he wasn’t done with Cik and Sheffield, and was seeking to file an interlocutory appeal (an appeal made before a trial has concluded) heading to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Cik and Sheffield declined to comment.

Hubbard said it was reassuring that Lynch had granted only two summary judgments, since all the defendants filed for them.

“The fact that he picked out two but left the rest is a good sign,” he said. “I think the rest will make it to trial.”

No trial date has been announced.