Dvorak v. Montana State Fund, 305 P.3d 873

Dvorak, employed by Wheat Montana from 2002 to May 6, 2011, developed work-related pain from repetitive work activities.
She sought medical treatment starting February 2006 and periodically through 2011; treatment included osteopathic manipulations and prescription medications.
In May 2011, Dvorak filed a workers’ compensation claim; State Fund denied the claim as untimely under the statute of limitations.
The Workers’ Compensation Court granted summary judgment for State Fund, concluding the claim was time-barred.
Dvorak argued the condition evolved into a compensable occupational disease only after late 2010 to early 2011, creating a material fact question about when she knew or should have known of the disease.
The Montana Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the date of knowledge was not amenable to summary resolution and that material facts remained to be resolved at trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the WCC erred in granting summary judgment applying the 1-year limit for occupational disease claims.	Dvorak knew she had an occupational disease based on medical evidence later in 2010–2011.	State Fund contends the 1-year limit began when she first sought treatment in 2006.	No; material facts about when knowledge of an occupational disease arose precluded summary judgment.

Gidley v. W.R. Grace & Co., 221 Mont. 36 (Mont. 1986) (controls which statute governs occupational disease claims (last day of employment))
Grande v. Montana State Fund, 364 Mont. 333, 274 P.3d 728 (MT Supreme Court 2012) (OD A merged into WCA; confirms statutory framework for occupational disease claims)
Siebken v. Voderberg, 367 Mont. 344, 291 P.3d 572 (MT Supreme Court 2012) (conflicting evidence on discovery of origin prevents summary resolution)