Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 39-71-508 (2026)

Coordination Of Remedies -- Limitation Of Liability Of Employee To Third-Party Providers -- Rights Of Third-Party Providers

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 39. LABOR

CHAPTER 71. WORKERS' COMPENSATION

Part 5. Uninsured Employers

Coordination Of Remedies -- Limitation Of Liability Of Employee To Third-Party Providers -- Rights Of Third-Party Providers

39-71-508. Coordination of remedies -- limitation of liability of employee to third-party providers -- rights of third-party providers. (1) An employee who suffers an injury arising out of and in the course of employment while working for an uninsured employer, as defined in 39-71-501, or an employee's beneficiaries in injuries resulting in death may pursue all remedies concurrently, including but not limited to:

(a) a claim for benefits from the uninsured employers' fund;

(b) a damage action against the employer in accordance with 39-71-509;

(c) an independent action against an employer as provided in 39-71-515; or

(d) any other civil remedy provided by law.

(2) An employee who is entitled to recover under this part is not liable to any third-party provider for services provided to the employee that are not reimbursed by the uninsured employers' fund.

(3) A third-party provider that is not fully reimbursed by the uninsured employers' fund for services provided to an injured employee may bring an action directly against the uninsured employer for the amount of services that were not paid by the uninsured employers' fund.

History: En. 92-213 by Sec. 5, Ch. 550, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 92-213(part); amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 601, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 48, L. 2007.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1983–2015 · leading case: Boehm v. Alanon Club, 722 P.2d 1160 (Mont. 1986).
Boehm v. Alanon Club, 722 P.2d 1160 (Mont. 1986). · cites it 23× “In an action for damages against an uninsured employer brought pursuant to Section 39-71-508, MCA, must the employee prove negligence or breach of duty by the employer in order to recover? 2.”
Barthule v. Karman, 886 P.2d 971 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 13× “He also contends, based on the language in § 39-71-508, MCA, that because Barthule initially pursued a claim with the uninsured employers’ fund he could not later pursue an action in district court because all remedies must be pursued at the same time.”
Olson v. Daughenbaugh, 2001 MT 284, 38 P.3d 154. · cites it 9× “Section 39-71-508, MCA, coordinates these remedies.”
Peyatt v. Moore, 2004 MT 341, 102 P.3d 535. · cites it 4× “¶10 For reasons unstated in this litigation, Moore was deemed not to have workers’ compensation insurance, and, as an uninsured employer, was subjected to suit for Peyatt’s injuries pursuant to § 39-71-508, MCA, and was prohibited from raising certain defenses, such as the…”
Buerkley v. Aspen Meadows Ltd. P'ship, 1999 MT 97, 980 P.2d 1046. · cites it 4× “¶14 Section 39-71-508, MCA (1993), provides in relevant part that: An employee who suffers an injury arising out of and in the course of employment while working for an uninsured employer as defined in 39-71-501.”
Waldo v. Montana Dep't of Labor & Indus. Uninsured Employers Fund (In Re Waldo), 186 B.R. 118 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1995). · cites it 2× “Mont.Code Ann. § 39-71-508. Thus the injury to Mr.”
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Bush Hog, LLC, 2009 MT 349, 219 P.3d 1249. · cites it 5× “Second, the DLI may order the uninsured employer to cease doing business. Section 39-71-507, MCA. Third, the *180 uninsured employer may be subject to liability in a damage action brought by the employee or in an action to recover the benefits due.”
Ridenour v. Equity Supply Co., 665 P.2d 783 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 3× “Section 39-71-508, MCA. Another section within the Occupational Disease Act supports our interpretation.”
Caldwell v. Great W. Sugar Co., 746 P.2d 627 (Mont. 1987). · cites it 6× “" (Emphasis added) Uninsured employer is defined by $ 39-71-501, MCA, as "an employer who has not properly complied with the provisions of 39-71-401.”
Neustrom v. State, Dep't of Labor & Indus., 939 P.2d 990 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 8× “” Instead, they are the basis of a separate dispute over the propriety, jurisdictionally and otherwise, of actions taken by UEF in regard to Davis’s pursuit of a remedy through that agency.”
Stokes v. Golden Triangle, Inc., 2015 MT 199, 353 P.3d 500. · cites it 3× “Section 39-71-508(lXb), MCA, permits an employee who suffers an injury while working for an “uninsured employer^ to “pursue all remedies” against the employer, including but not limited to “a damage action against the employer.”
Donahue v. Convenience Disposal, Inc., 818 P.2d 839 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 2× “On July 12, 1984, Donahue filed with the District Court a complaint against Haggerty d/b/a Convenience to recover damages for his November 15th injury under § 39-71-508, MCA (1983). On January 13, 1986, Donahue filed an amended complaint against the Defendants.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 39-71-508(lXb): 1 case
Stokes v. Golden Triangle, Inc., 2015 MT 199, 353 P.3d 500. “Section 39-71-508(lXb), MCA, permits an employee who suffers an injury while working for an “uninsured employer^ to “pursue all remedies” against the employer, including but not limited to “a damage action against the employer.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.