Aaby dating gay men dating washington dc friel

Insurer which joined decedent's ex-wife into case involving death benefits moved for default against her where she was served with a Summons, and failed to timely respond to the petition, discovery requests, or a motion.

Court issued Order To File Response Or To Show Cause Regarding Default, which sets a hearing on default pursuant to ARM 24.5.327. Insurer moved for summary judgment against minor daughter and ex-wife of decedent, arguing neither filed claim for death benefits within a year of the decedent's death pursuant to section 39-71-601, MCA (1993).

The claim must be accompanied with proof of death and proof of relationship, showing the parties entitled to compensation, certificate of the attending physician, if any, and such other proof as may be required by the department.

Aaby dating-47

Insurer moved for summary judgment against minor daughter and ex-wife of decedent, arguing neither filed claim for death benefits within a year of the decedent's death.

The motion regarding the daughter is denied where no guardian or guardian is appointed for that purpose and the statute does not begin to run until appointment.

King (King), a former spouse of the decedent who was joined into the case on the motion of MMIA.

Also at issue is whether default should be taken against King.

The Court does not reach the merits of the summary judgment motion against the ex-wife where the insurer has also moved for default against her, which motion must first be resolved after notice and hearing.

Constitutions, Statutes, Regulations and Rules: Workers' Compensation Court Rules: ARM 24.5.327.

I rejected that argument, based upon my reading of Montana statutes and case law (8 This case is indistinguishable. Seaman during 1996, and regardless of whom he represented as attorney at law, no one had authority to file and pursue a workers' compensation claim on Rebekah's behalf until an appointment was made for that purpose.

The only difference suggested by the insurer involves a letter written by attorney Garry D. Aaby is the legal guardian of Rebekah Glasscock, daughter of the deceased, James Glasscock." (Reply Brief in Support of MMIA's Motion for Default/Summary Judgment on Beneficiary Claims at 3.) The insurer contends this letter constitutes a concession that Tami Aaby was guardian and proves that the minor was, at that point, represented by counsel, who should have filed a timely claim with all the information required by section 39-71-604, MCA (1993). Since the order of appointment of Tami Aaby as guardian 10 In her opposition to the motion for summary judgment, petitioner argues a claim was in fact filed in a timely fashion, in the form of a letter written by attorney Kenneth S. I need not reach the question whether that letter asserted a claim on behalf of Rebekah Glasscock or whether it was sufficient under sections 39-71-601 and -604, MCA (1993).

: A petition for death benefits was filed on behalf of the decedent's daughter, Rebekah Glasscock.

The petition was brought by Rebekah's mother, Tami Aaby, who was divorced from the decedent prior to his injury.

King, who was married to the decedent at the time of his injury but not at the time of his death.

Tags: , ,