Legal Opinion

Bustell v. AIG Claims Service, Inc.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 2004No. 04-124PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Regnier

¶1 Ann Bustell (Bustell) appeals from the judgment entered by the Workers’ Compensation Court (WCC) granting attorney fees at an hourly rate pursuant to § 39-71-614, MCA, instead of the foil contingency fee agreement amount between her and her attorney, Paul E. Toeniss (Toeniss). We affirm.

¶2 We restate the issues on appeal as follows:

¶3 1. Whether the WCC erred in holding the hourly attorney fee rule requirement of § 39-71-614, MCA (1999), passed constitutional scrutiny under substantive due process.

¶4 2. Whether the WCC erred in holding the hourly attorney fee rule requirement of §…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Powell v. State Compensation Insurance FundMontana Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Wight v. Hughes Livestock Co., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Henry v. State Compensation Insurance FundMontana Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Kloepfer v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Baeta v. Don Tripp TruckingMontana Supreme Court · 1992

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Montana Cannabis Industry Ass'n v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 2016
  2. Wilkes v. Montana State FundMontana Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Big Sky Colony, Inc. v. Montana Department of Labor & IndustryMontana Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Gazelka v. St. Peter's Hosp.Montana Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Big Sky Colony, Inc. v. Montana Department of Labor & IndustryMontana Supreme Court · 2012

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API