[1981, 1983] Jones v. Reliance National Indemnity Co. [3/17/99] 1999 MTWCC 22 Under section 39-71-705, MCA (1981, 1983), benefits commonly referenced as "indemnity benefits" are available based on a schedule of injuries. Evaluating the various statutory factors in light of evidence in the record, the WCC finds claimant entitled to 100 weeks of PPD benefits for his 1983 injury and an additional 250 weeks of PPD benefits for his 1987 injury.

Burgan v. Nationwide Ins. Co. [10/04/95] 1995 MTWCC 75 The permanent partial disability benefits available under sections 39-71-705 through -708, MCA (1985), commonly referenced as “indemnity benefits,” seek to indemnify the injured worker for “possible” loss of future earning capacity, rather than any “actual” loss of earning capacity. These benefits are based on a schedule of injuries, but in the case of a non-scheduled injury, such as the back injury at issue here, the maximum number of weeks of benefits is 500 weeks, with the award for less than a total loss to “be proportionate to loss or loss of use.” §39-71-706(1), MCA (1985). In determining disability, the Court must consider the claimant’s age, education, work experience, pain and disability, actual wage loss, and possible loss of future earning capacity.

[1983] Burglund v. Liberty Mutual Northwest Ins. Co. [4/10/95] 1995 MTWCC 25A UPS driver is entitled to benefits under sections 39-71-705 through -708, MCA (1983) where those benefits are to indemnify the worker for "possible" loss of future earning capacity. "Indemnity benefits" under those statutes are based on a schedule of injuries set forth in section 39-71-705, MCA (1983). In the case of a non-scheduled injury, such as claimant's back condition the maximum number of weeks of benefits is 500. With reference to the statute's purpose of providing benefits in proportion to the loss, and the factors for consideration (age, education, work experience, pain and disability, actual wage loss, possible loss of future earning capacity), the Court finds an additional ten percent appropriate, which amounts to a total of twenty percent given the ten percent award for impairment already paid. [Note: the WCC was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Burglund v. Liberty Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 179 Mont. 298, 927 P.2d 1006 (1996).]