Legal Opinion

Hogenson Const. of North Dakota v. Montana State Fund

Montana Supreme Court

Decided October 22, 2007No. DA 07-0015PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Morris

¶1 Hogenson Construction of North Dakota (Hogenson) appeals from an order of the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County, granting Montana State Fund’s (State Fund) motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶2 Hogenson is a construction company located in North Dakota. Hogenson performed construction work in Montana. Montana law required Hogenson to have workers’ compensation coverage for any employees working in Montana. Section 39-71-402(5), MCA. Hogenson maintained coverage in Montana through State Fund and paid premiums for the policy period…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Staples v. FARMERS UNION MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANYMontana Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Grenz v. Fire and Cas. of ConnecticutMontana Supreme Court · 1993

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Lloyd A. Twite Family Partnership v. Unitrin Multi Line InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 2008
  2. State v. Butte-Silver Bow CountyMontana Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Edwards v. Cascade County Sheriff's DepartmentMontana Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Klein v. State Ex Rel. Montana Department of CorrectionsMontana Supreme Court · 2008
  5. State v. Butte-Silver BowMontana Supreme Court · 2009

3 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