Legal Opinion

Grenz v. Fire & Casualty of Connecticut

Montana Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1991No. 91-221PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Gray

The claimant, Samuel J. Grenz, appearing pro se, appeals from the judgment of the Workers’ Compensation Court denying him workers’ compensation benefits. We affirm.

The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the Workers’ Compensation Court erred in ruling that the claimant is not permanently totally disabled as a result of his August 22,1984, right elbow injury and that the claimant’s psychological problems are not compensably related to that injury.

At the time of trial, the claimant was 46 years old, married and living in Whitefish, Montana. His work history includes employment as a laborer,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Steer, Inc. v. Department of RevenueMontana Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Brown v. AmentMontana Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Kraft v. Flathead Valley Labor & ContractorsMontana Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Baldwin v. Orient Express RestaurantMontana Supreme Court · 1990

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Lovell v. State Compensation Mutual Insurance FundMontana Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Ford v. Sentry Casualty Co.Montana Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Grenz v. Fire and Cas. of ConnecticutMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Grenz v. Fire Casualty of ConnectMontana Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Nave v. State Compensation Mutual Insurance FundMontana Supreme Court · 1992

9 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