Dostal v. Uninsured Employers' Fund [11/05/12] 2012 MTWCC 41 Petitioner’s challenge to the validity of ARM 24.29.1409 is in line with the cases she cites.  Most pertinently, in another case, the Montana Supreme Court held that a rule which attempted to engraft an additional statutory provision was invalid.  If the legislature had envisioned a time limitation for § 39-71-704, MCA (1991), it would have included it in the statute.  Therefore the version of ARM 24.29.1409 which was in effect at the time of Petitioner’s industrial injury is invalid insofar as it attempts to engraft a time limitation upon § 39-71-704, MCA (1991).