Employment: Aid and Sustenance
MONTANA SUPREME COURT DECISIONS |
Hopkins v. Uninsured Employers' Fund, 2011 MT 49 Since this Court is in the best position to weigh the credibility of witnesses, the Montana Supreme Court held that this Court did not err when it found the claimant’s employer’s testimony that he gave the claimant money not because of work performed but “out of his heart” incredible, and ultimately concluded that the claimant’s services were not in exchange for aid or sustenance only. |
MONTANA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COURT DECISIONS |
Hammer
v. UEF [5/31/96] 1996 MTWCC 40 Claimant
temporarily living with alleged employer per terms of release on her own
recognizance from criminal charges was employee within WCA where she worked
for board and room. She was, however, exempt from the WCA under the provision
relating to work for "aid and sustenance only" set out in section
39-71-401(h), MCA (1991). Note: this decision was affirmed
by the Montana Supreme Court in Hammer
v. Uninsured Employers' Fund, 280 Mont. 371, 929 P.2d 883 (1996)
(No. 96-365). |