Wommack v. National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co., et al. [04/28/15] 2015 MTWCC 7 Where a claimant continued to be exposed to asbestos under the type and kind of conditions that could have caused his asbestos-related disease after a particular insurer ceased covering the employer, the insurer was entitled to summary judgment since it was not the insurer at risk during Petitioner’s last injurious exposure.

Wommack v. National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co., et al. [04/14/15] 2015 MTWCC 5 While § 39-72-303(1), MCA, is written in terms of “employer” liability, it is the employer’s insurer that is actually liable for the payment of benefits.  Since Petitioner was never injuriously exposed to asbestos when CHS was at risk as a self-insured employer, CHS is not liable for Petitioner’s asbestos-related disease as a matter of law

Baeth v. Liberty NW Ins. Corp. [05/05/14] 2014 MTWCC 10 Where the opinions of the IME physicians and a radiologist experienced in reading ARD x-rays were diametrically opposed to the opinions of the treating physicians, the Court gave greater weight to the treating physicians’ opinions that Petitioner was suffering from ARD, particularly where the record demonstrates that the treating physicians had more experience in identifying and treating Libby amphibole ARD than any other medical providers.