Stavenjord v. Montana State Fund

¶49 I respectfully dissent with the Court’s holding on Issue 2.

¶50 The Court arrives at a conclusion which seems to be “fair.” Indeed, requiring equal compensation for workers suffering from an equal impairment would also seem to be the essence of constitutional “equal *479protection.” However, it is not. In reaching its decision, the Court has applied an incomplete constitutional analysis.

¶51 The Court’s opinion consists of a restatement of the rationale offered by the Court in Henry v. State Compensation Ins. Fund, 1999 MT 126, 294 Mont. 449, 982 P.2d 456, and a conclusion that “our reasoning…