24.5.307A JOINDER AND SERVICE OF ALLEGED UNINSURED EMPLOYERS

Hopkins v. Uninsured Employers' Fund [03/20/09] 2009 MTWCC 12 ARM 24.5.307A was promulgated by this Court to foster judicial economy and it did so. However, judicial economy does not trump statutory mandates and therefore the statutory procedures regarding alleged uninsured employers must be followed by the UEF and by this Court. Conjectured savings in judicial economy cannot be a source of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Raymond v. Uninsured Employers' Fund [12/11/08] 2008 MTWCC 52 ARM 24.5.307A was promulgated by this Court to foster judicial economy. Although it serves a practical purpose, it contravenes a statutory scheme. Conjectured savings in judicial economy cannot be a source of subject matter jurisdiction.

Raymond v. Uninsured Employers' Fund [09/19/08] 2008 MTWCC 45 Although ARM 24.5.307A purports to give a claimant the right to name an uninsured employer as a party to an action, an employee cannot bring an action for benefits directly against an uninsured employer in this Court. Such an action can only brought in District Court pursuant to §§ 39-71-515, -516, MCA.

Raymond v. Uninsured Employers' Fund [09/19/08] 2008 MTWCC 45 Although the procedure set forth in ARM 24.5.307A fosters judicial economy, it is the legislature’s province to determine the process by which a dispute between an uninsured employer and the UEF is resolved and it has explicitly set forth that process in § 39-71-506, MCA. Notwithstanding the practical procedure that this Court adopted in ARM 24.5.307A, the Court’s rule cannot supercede the statutory process the legislature established by automatically deeming the uninsured employer a party to the action.