maintenance claim (Montana) · Go Syfert
← Montana issues

maintenance claim in Montana

5 Montana opinions name it 1 courts 1930–1987 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Montana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Montana.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Montana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
Chmielewska v. Butte & Superior Mining Co. green
mont · 1927
2 sentences

1943Co., 81 Mont. 36 , 261 Pac. 616, 617 ), so likewise are the provisions of section 2933 mandatory and indispensable to the maintenance of a claim for compensation.

1943Co., 81 Mont. 36 , 261 Pac. 616, 617 ), so likewise are the provisions of section 2933 mandatory and indispensable to the maintenance of a claim for compensation.

21930–1943
Hunt v. Sherwin Williams Co. green
mont · 1981
1 sentence

1987Hunt v. Sherwin Williams Company (1981), 624 P.2d 489 , [ 38 St.Rep. 358 ,] Masters, by his own admission, failed to notify his employer within 60 days of his injury.

11987–1987
Bender v. Roundup Mining Co. green
mont · 1960
2 sentences

1987Actual knowledge of the accident and injury on the part of the employer or the employer’s managing agent or superintendent in charge of the work upon which the injured employee was engaged at the time of the injury is equivalent to notice.” The provisions of the notice statute are “mandatory and *444 compliance with its requirements is indispensable to the maintenance of a claim for compensation.” Bender v. Roundup Mining Company (1960), 138 Mont. 306, 309 , 356 P.2d 469, 470 .

1987Actual knowledge of the accident and injury on the part of the employer or the employer’s managing agent or superintendent in charge of the work upon which the injured employee was engaged at the time of the injury is equivalent to notice.” The provisions of the notice statute are “mandatory and *444 compliance with its requirements is indispensable to the maintenance of a claim for compensation.” Bender v. Roundup Mining Company (1960), 138 Mont. 306, 309 , 356 P.2d 469, 470 .

11987–1987
Heirs of Gómez v. Colón Gómez neutral
prsupreme · 1944
2 sentences

1950Helena Water Co. v. City of Helena, 24 Mont. 521 , 63 Pac. 99, 105 , 55 L.R.A. 336 , 81 Am.

1950Helena Water Co. v. City of Helena, 24 Mont. 521 , 63 Pac. 99, 105 , 55 L.

11950–1950
State ex rel. Helena Water Works Co. v. City of Helena green
mont · 1900
2 sentences

1950Helena Water Co. v. City of Helena, 24 Mont. 521 , 63 Pac. 99, 105 , 55 L.R.A. 336 , 81 Am.

1950Helena Water Co. v. City of Helena, 24 Mont. 521 , 63 Pac. 99, 105 , 55 L.

11950–1950
Hammer v. Michael neutral
ny · 1927
1 sentence

1943Supp. 744, 746 , affirmed in 244 N. Y. 557 , 155 N. E. 895 .

11943–1943
Matter of Finch v. Buffalo Envelope Company neutral
ny · 1927
1 sentence

1943Supp. 744, 746 , affirmed in 244 N. Y. 557 , 155 N. E. 895 .

11943–1943
Claim of Finch v. Buffalo Envelope Co. neutral
nyappdiv · 1926
2 sentences

1943It was so held in the Maki Case, supra, and said to be “indispensable to the maintenance of a claim for compensation.” The reasons for requiring notice are well stated in the case of Finch v. Buffalo Envelope Co., 218 App. Div. 31 , 217 N. Y.

1943It was so held in the Maki Case, supra, and said to be “indispensable to the maintenance of a claim for compensation.” The reasons for requiring notice are well stated in the case of Finch v. Buffalo Envelope Co., 218 App. Div. 31 , 217 N. Y.

11943–1943
Maki v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co. green
mont · 1930
2 sentences

1934Co., 87 Mont. 314 , 287 Pac. 170, 173 ; and, after referring with approval to the Chmielewska Case, supra, and quoting therefrom as to the effect of that statute, said: “So likewise are the provisions of section 2933 mandatory and indispensable to the maintenance of a claim.” However, actual knowledge of the injury by the employer or certain officers or agents designated by the statute is equivalent to the service of such notice.

1934Co., 87 Mont. 314 , 287 Pac. 170, 173 ; and, after referring with approval to the Chmielewska Case, supra, and quoting therefrom as to the effect of that statute, said: “So likewise are the provisions of section 2933 mandatory and indispensable to the maintenance of a claim.” However, actual knowledge of the injury by the employer or certain officers or agents designated by the statute is equivalent to the service of such notice.

11934–1934
Smith v. Industrial Accident Commission neutral
cal · 1917
2 sentences

1930(Smith v. Industrial Acc. Com., 174 Cal. 199 , 162 Pac. 636, 637 .) In the Smith Case the court, commenting on a statute identical with section 2933, said: “It is clear from these provisions that any kind of knowledge, other than actual, or first-hand knowledge, would be insufficient, for the statutory equivalent of the information required to be given in the notice is actual knowledge. ’ ’ [Reversing an award made on as strong a showing, at least, as was here made, the court said of the oral communication: “It was information conveyed * * * rather -than his actual knowledge * * * upon which t

1930(Smith v. Industrial Acc. Com., 174 Cal. 199 , 162 Pac. 636, 637 .) In the Smith Case the court, commenting on a statute identical with section 2933, said: “It is clear from these provisions that any kind of knowledge, other than actual, or first-hand knowledge, would be insufficient, for the statutory equivalent of the information required to be given in the notice is actual knowledge. ’ ’ [Reversing an award made on as strong a showing, at least, as was here made, the court said of the oral communication: “It was information conveyed * * * rather -than his actual knowledge * * * upon which t

11930–1930

Where else courts name it

NY 36 (1846–2024) IL 21 (1905–2026) CA 20 (1892–2025) NJ 12 (1926–2025) MO 11 (1918–2023) TX 10 (1858–2019) MN 10 (1980–2006) MI 9 (1967–2018) GA 9 (1847–2011) MD 7 (1853–2009) AL 7 (1878–1981) LA 6 (1919–1969) KS 6 (1926–2022) MT 5 (1930–1987) WI 5 (1999–2025) PA 5 (1923–2021) WV 5 (1916–2011) WA 5 (1908–2018) CO 4 (1888–2026) WY 4 (1974–2021) FL 4 (1995–2014) DE 4 (1992–2025) TN 4 (1896–2016) CT 3 (1979–2015) IN 3 (1930–2000) OK 3 (1925–2019) KY 2 (1990–2006) OH 2 (1916–1987) MA 2 (1984–2000) VT 2 (2020–2025) MS 2 (1990–2010) OR 2 (1906–1999) AZ 2 (1952–2016)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check