Court Opinion

ID: 9510127
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:52:56.604766+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:57.209478
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE HUNT
specially concurs.
The majority has properly applied the law, and on that basis I agree with the majority opinion. I write separately, however, to express my *84concern with the law that occupational disease is segregated from our scheme of workers’ compensation which has been applicable in Montana since the Anaconda Company was at its zenith.
The law in Montana that distinguishes occupational disease from compensable injuries under the Workers’ Compensation Act is a hangover from the days when the Anaconda Company strongly influenced legislation. Simply, the distinction was made so that the Anaconda Company would not have to compensate miners suffering from silicosis and other lung diseases according to the workers’ compensation scheme.
It is silly to segregate occupational disease from the workers’ compensation system to the point where a person suffering from an occupational disease is not entitled to rehabilitation benefits. The basis for such segregation has disappeared, and so should the segregation. Montana should join the many other states that include occupational disease within the definition of an injury covered by workers’ compensation.