Legal Opinion
Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Peterson
Montana Supreme Court
Decided December 28, 1993No. 93-363PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gray
In a case of first impression, the issue before this Court is whether an individual major medical expense insurance policy that excludes coverage for normal pregnancy and childbirth violates § 49-2-309, MCA. Unique to Montana, § 49-2-309, MCA, prohibits discrimination based solely on sex in the issuance, operation, coverage, rates or premiums of any type of insurance policy. The First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County, affirmed a determination by the Montana Human Rights Commission (the Commission) that the policy issued by Bankers Life and Casualty Co. (Bankers Life) unlawfully…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Massachusetts Electric Co. v. Massachusetts Commission Against DiscriminationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
- Quaker Oats Co. v. Cedar Rapids Human Rights CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1978
- GBN, INC. v. Montana Dept. of RevenueMontana Supreme Court · 1991
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Rakestraw v. California Physicians' ServiceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- Lavalley v. E.B. & A.C. Whiting Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1997
- Donaldson v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 2012
- Donaldson v. State of MontanaMontana Supreme Court · 2012
- Fjelstad v. StateMontana Supreme Court · 1996
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.