Proof: Inferences

McLeish v. Rochdale Ins. Co. [07/18/11] 2011 MTWCC 18 Respondent moved for summary judgment. Petitioner agreed to a joint statement of uncontroverted facts and further agreed that the only issue before the Court was a legal question. Although Respondent then argued that its motion was a “joint motion,” the Court disagreed and held that Petitioner was the non-moving party and therefore entitled to all reasonable inferences in his favor.
Phillips v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. [10/9/98] 1998 MTWCC 71 The rule of Harmon v. Deaconess Hospital, 191 Mont. 285, 289, 623 P.2d 1372, 1374 (1981), which holds that the testimony of a witness that he does not recall whether a certain event or conversation took place does not contradict the positive testimony that such an event or conversation took place, does not require the Court to find in favor of claimant, who recalled reporting an injury, where claimant's supervisor testified he did not recall the report, because other evidence impacts the Court's consideration of the issue, including the supervisor's testimony it was his regular practice to fill out incident reports, no incident report concerning this matter existed, and claimant's version of events was contradicted by other credible evidence.