Category: Firm News

Recently, a skiing accident near Beartooth Pass resulted in a skier falling 400 feet down the mountain and being seriously injured. The question in this fortunate situation is whether anyone other than himself might be responsible for his accident and subsequent injuries. News reports were not clear as to whose property he was on at the time of the accident. As reported in our previous blog, recreational facility proprietors have a new protection against lawsuits from their customers. Liability waivers can be required by recreational providers to shield themselves from being sued by those injured on their premises. The shield is not absolute in that negligence can still be alleged. The

Pharmaceutical manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline paid over one billion dollars in 2012 in a settlement with the federal government over the sale and use an anti-nausea drug, Zofran. That has not, however, stopped the filing of at least one new lawsuit over damages from its use. A Billings couple has filed suit claiming that use of the drug during pregnancy caused the couple’s child to be born with cleft lip and palate. The Billings couple’s child was born in 1998, but they were unaware of any link between the drug and cleft lip and palate until 2015. The baby was diagnosed with the abnormality at the time of birth. She had 10 corrective

Genetic information is information that can be ascertained through the study of a person’s DNA. Scientific advances over recent years have made the use of DNA an integral part of medical treatments and research, criminal proceedings, genealogy, and other uses. We have all heard of persons being exonerated of a crime based on DNA evidence, stem cells being used to treat diseases, and the animal cloning. Because DNA is at the core of the human existence, how could it not find its way into the workplace? In 2008, Congress recognized the potential for genetic information to become an issue in the employer-employee relationship and passed the Genetic Information and Nondiscrimination Act. This

There are many legal terms that are used every day by non-lawyers in a non-legal way. The word “negligence” is one of those terms. People use the word “negligent” every day to describe someone who did something wrong. In a very broad sense, this is correct; however, from a legal standpoint, the term “negligence” has a very specific meaning. Many personal injury lawsuits are based on negligence, which is when one party fails to use reasonable care in his behavior, actions, or inactions. Two good examples of negligence cases are automobile accidents and medical malpractice cases. The four components of a Montana negligence lawsuit, all of which must be proven to recover

Across the United States, legislation and discussions are cropping up regarding tort reform. This blog will examine what tort reform is, as well as Montana’s position on this controversial issue. A tort is simply a wrongful act for which someone can recover damages under the law. Tort lawsuits are sometimes known as personal injury lawsuits. Tort reform is aimed at reducing the number of frivolous lawsuits and the amount of damages recoverable in lawsuits. These goals are usually accomplished by legislative bodies making changes to laws that limit the ability to file lawsuits or limit the amount of money that may be recovered in certain types of lawsuits. Following are a

When we first sit down with a potential new client, one of the most important topics we discuss is the date by which a lawsuit must filed. Non-lawyers often do not realize that the law provides strict time limits within which lawsuits must be filed. These are called statutes of limitation, and in our state, they are set by the Montana Legislature. The applicable statute of limitation depends upon the type of lawsuit being filed. Most personal injury lawsuits, which are based on negligence, must be filed within three years of one of two dates: (1) the date of the accident or injury; or (2) the date on which the facts

If you have ever applied to, currently serve, or have served in, the United States Military, you are entitled to protections in the workplace under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Act. These rights include job protection, freedom from discrimination, and continuation of insurance benefits. If you leave your job to join the military, you are entitled to be reemployed in your former position or one of equal statute, as if you had never been absent, provided that you do the following: Provide advance notice to your employer that you are leaving to serve in the military; Serve in the military for five years or less while with the employer; Return

Have you ever considered whether an adult child could bring a lawsuit for the wrongful injury of his or her parent? In Montana, the answer is “yes”, provided certain conditions are met. In the winter of 2014, the Montana Supreme Court issued an opinion in a case involving a father who had been injured when another vehicle crossed the center line and hit his truck head-on. The father suffered severe injuries, including traumatic brain injury (TBI), plus several conditions and psychological issues secondary to TBI. He had multiple surgeries after the accident, he could no longer drive, and he required around-the-clock supervision. The father had two daughters, who were 15 and 18

Most personal injury lawsuits are based on a legal theory called negligence. The basic concept of a negligence lawsuit is that one person wrongfully caused injury to another. In some cases, however, a shortcut called “res ipsa loquitur” may be applied. Loosely translated, this Latin phrase means “the thing speaks for itself”. Generally speaking, a negligence lawsuit in Montana requires four elements: The existence of a duty from one person to another; A breach of that duty; Causation of the injury; and Damages suffered as a result of the breach. The theory of res ipsa loquitur is sometimes relevant to the causation part of a case. However, it may be used

Does a landowner have to warn pedestrians who are crossing the street on adjacent property about open and obvious conditions? In a recent case involving a pedestrian hit while jaywalking, the Montana Supreme Court held that no such duty existed. A passenger traveling to Arizona exited a bus at the Butte depot. She then jaywalked across a dark four-lane road and was struck by a car. There was a crosswalk a mere 100 feet from where she was injured. She and her husband sued the county that owned the depot, alleging that the county should have warned them not to cross the road at night. The trial court rejected this argument,