Legal Opinion · Dissent

Haman v. MacO Insurance Co.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 2004No. 02-794Published

1DissentJustice Nelson

f 18 I dissent from the Court’s decision that MACo is not entitled to a collateral source reduction of the jury’s award in this case.

¶19 Section 27-1-308, MCA, the collateral source reduction statute, provides as follows:(1) In an action arising from bodily injury or death when the total award against all defendants is in excess of $50,000 and the plaintiff will be fully compensated for his damages, exclusive of court costs and attorney fees, a plaintiffs recovery must be reduced by any amount paid or payable from a collateral source that does not have a subrogation right.(3) The jury shall…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dodd v. Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  2. Schuff v. A.T. Klemens & SonMontana Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Estate of BraunMontana Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Allied Mutual Insurance Company v. LarrivaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1973
  5. Dill v. Montana Thirteenth Judicial District CourtMontana Supreme Court · 1999

2 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