[Equity] Estoppel and Waiver: Estoppel by Silence

Auchenbach v. UEF [03/29/06] 2006 MTWCC 13 The Court found the elements of estoppel by silence satisfied where the UEF had a statutory duty to notify the mediation unit of its acceptance or rejection of a mediation recommendation within twenty-five days under § 39-71-520(2), MCA, failed to notify the mediation unit of its acceptance or rejection, let the sixty-day statute of limitation for filing a petition with the Court under § 39-71-2411(6), MCA, run on a pro sé claimant, and moved to dismiss based on the claimant’s failure to file her claim within sixty days of the mailing of the mediator’s recommendation.
MP Livestock Trust/Perry Polzing Trucking [02/04/05] 2005 MTWCC 6 Where the Department of Labor and Industry has knowledge that a professional employer organization (PEO) is no longer insured as required by section 39-8-207(4)(c), MCA (1999-2001), it has a duty to promptly suspend the PEO’s license and notify the Montana business using employees furnished by the PEO of the lapse of insurance. Its failure to do so estops it from seeking a penalty against the Montana business under section 39-71-504(1), MCA (1999-2001), where the Montana employer was without notice or knowledge of the lapse of insurance and relied to its detriment on such lack of knowledge by continuing to reimburse the PEO for workers’ compensation premiums and failing to secure its own workers’ compensation insurance coverage.

MP Livestock Trust/Perry Polzing Trucking [02/04/05] 2005 MTWCC 6 Estoppel by silence applies where the party to be estopped had a duty to speak but failed to do so with either the intent to deceive or a willingness that another would be deceived and where the party seeking to impose the estoppel did not have access to accurate information and was misled to its detriment by the silence.