Prindel v. Ravalli County (2006 MT 62) (landmark governmental liability decision)
There is generally no duty to protect others from harm from third persons. Prindel establishes that the County had the duty
to protect Prindel from the man who stabbed Prindel in the heart when the County failed to jail that man after the Court had
ordered that man to jail.
Swanson v. Hartford Ins. Co. of Midwest (2002 MT 81) (leading automobile insurance decision)
Swanson established that, in Montana, a victim of a car crash must be totally reimbursed for all losses as well as
costs, including attorney fees involved in recovering those losses, before the insurance company gets paid back (subrogation).
The rule applies regardless of insurance policy language to the contrary.
Caldwell v. MACo Workers' Compensation Trust (2011 MT 162) (important constitutional and age-discrimination workers' compensation case)
An injured worker was denied vocational rehabilitation benefits by an insurer based on a workers' compensation statute
categorically eliminating vocational rehabilitation benefits to all claimants eligible for social security retirement
benefits. The Montana Supreme Court held the statute unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection guarantee
the State Constitution provides older workers.
Lockhart v. New Hampshire Ins. Co. and Petak v. Liberty Ins. Co. (1999 MT 205) (landmark workers' compensation attorney fee decision)
This decision saves injured workers money every time the insurer denies a claim or refuses to pay a medical bill and the
injured worker hires a lawyer who gets the insurer to pay.
Lamb v. Dist. Ct. of Fourth Jud. Dist. (2010 MT 141) (the "extraordinary remedy" of supervisory control over a district court)
The law can be complicated and Montana's courts are extremely busy. Consequently, some mistakes are inevitable. We have a
Supreme Court to correct mistakes made by the lower courts. That is the purpose of an appeal. Generally, a litigant must
wait until the district court has made a final ruling, usually after trial, before the Supreme Court will correct an error
made by the district court. This prevents a blizzard of interim appeals before a final result. Of course, the Supreme Court
has the authority to correct a lower court mistake before a final ruling, but it is extremely rare. So rare that the Supreme
Court calls it "an extraordinary remedy." In this case, the Supreme Court took supervisory control of the district court's
decision to stay an insurance bad faith lawsuit until the conclusion of the underlying workers' compensation claim.