Montana Auto Insurance & Crash Law · Citizen Guide

Damages After a Montana Motor-Vehicle Crash

A crash claim is not valued by multiplying medical bills or applying a generic settlement formula. Montana damages law asks what losses were actually caused by the crash, what reliable evidence proves those losses, what future harm is sufficiently established, and how current Montana statutes measure medical, economic, noneconomic and property damages.

Current-law review: Sept. 12, 2026 2021 medical-damages law controls modern claims 2025 vehicle-value statute

Montana begins with the detriment the wrongful conduct actually caused

Montana's general tort measure seeks compensation for legally recoverable detriment proximately caused by another person's wrongful conduct, subject to more specific statutes governing particular categories of loss.

MCA § 27-1-317 provides that for breach of an obligation not arising from contract, damages generally are the amount that will compensate for all detriment proximately caused by the wrong, whether the particular consequence could have been anticipated or not.

The objective is compensation—not a formula. Ask what the crash actually took from the injured person and what reliable evidence establishes that loss.
Policy limits are not the measure of damages. A $25,000 policy does not make a claim worth $25,000. A $500,000 policy does not make a claim worth $500,000. Damages and available insurance are separate questions.

Common categories of Montana crash damages

Economic

Past medical treatment

Qualifying reasonable and necessary medical care caused by the crash, measured under current MCA §§ 27-1-302 and 27-1-308.

Economic

Future medical treatment

Reasonable and necessary future treatment sufficiently established by the evidence and valued under Montana's current medical-damages statute.

Economic

Past lost earnings

Income and employment benefits actually lost because crash injuries prevented or limited work during a past period.

Economic

Loss of earning capacity

A lasting reduction in the person's ability to earn income in the future. It is different from merely adding missed paychecks.

Noneconomic

Pain & suffering

Reasonable compensation for physical pain and suffering caused by the injury, including sufficiently supported future pain.

Noneconomic

Emotional harm

Mental and emotional consequences caused by the crash and injury, when supported by the evidence.

Noneconomic

Loss of established course of life

In a qualifying lasting injury, impairment of the ability to pursue the activities and way of life established before the injury.

Property

Vehicle & other property

Repair, actual replacement value when totaled, qualifying loss of use, towing, storage and other provable property loss.

Montana's medical-expense rule changed materially in 2021

For claims accruing on or after April 30, 2021, MCA § 27-1-308 supplies the principal Montana measure of recoverable medical-services damages and limits the medical-charge evidence presented to the factfinder.

Do not value a modern Montana bodily-injury claim simply by adding the original face amount of every medical bill. That is no longer the governing statutory measure.

Current recovery is limited to qualifying amounts actually:

  • paid by or on behalf of the plaintiff to providers for reasonable and necessary medical services or treatment;
  • necessary to satisfy qualifying medical obligations incurred and still owing and payable at trial; and
  • necessary to provide reasonable and necessary future medical services or treatment.
Build a payment ledger—not merely a bill total. For each provider identify the amount billed, contractual adjustment, amount paid, payer, remaining legally payable balance and any possible reimbursement or subrogation interest.

Contractual discounts and writeoffs are excluded from the jury's medical-damages measure

Section 27-1-308 directs the factfinder to determine the medical-services award without considering provider charges resolved through:

  • contractual discounts
  • price reductions
  • disallowances
  • gifts
  • writeoffs
  • other amounts not paid

For medical charges incurred but not yet paid, the statute also restricts evidence of amounts exceeding the sum for which those charges could be satisfied if submitted to qualifying health insurance or a public or government-sponsored health benefit program for which the plaintiff is eligible.

The statute contains a comparable limitation for qualifying future medical charges.

Medical accounting can be legally significant. “Billed,” “allowed,” “paid,” “written off,” “still owed,” “recoverable as tort damages,” and “subject to reimbursement” can describe different numbers.

Older Montana medical-damages cases must be separated from the current statute

Before the 2021 amendment, Montana cases addressed broader proof concerning the reasonable value of medical treatment and the effect of provider reductions.

Meek v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 2015 MT 130, belongs to that earlier legal framework.

Do not use Meek-era “full billed charges” language as the current rule for a post-April 30, 2021 claim. The Legislature expressly stated that § 27-1-308 abrogates prior common-law collateral-source rules, court decisions and prior statutes governing the recoverable amount for medical services and treatment.

Gibson confirms the dividing line

Gibson v. United States, 2021 MT 309, involved a claim accruing before the new statute became effective.

The Montana Supreme Court specifically recognized that the 2021 legislation applied prospectively to claims accruing on or after its effective date and therefore answered the certified questions under the former law.

Future medical care requires proof that the future loss is sufficiently established

MCA § 27-1-203 permits recovery for detriment certain to result in the future. Section 27-1-308 separately governs the recoverable amount for reasonable and necessary future medical treatment.

Future care can include, when adequately supported:

  • physician follow-up
  • surgery
  • physical therapy
  • occupational therapy
  • medication
  • injections
  • diagnostic testing
  • psychological treatment
  • medical equipment
  • home assistance
  • recurring treatment
  • long-term care
“Possibly someday” is not the same as proven future damage. Build evidence showing why the treatment is expected, its likely frequency and duration, and the legally permitted measure of its future financial cost.

Past lost earnings and diminished earning capacity are different claims

Past

Lost earnings

Income the claimant would have received but for an injury-related inability to work during an identified past period.

Future

Loss of earning capacity

A reduction in the person's ability to earn money in the future because of lasting injury or impairment.

Thomas v. Whiteside

Thomas v. Whiteside, 148 Mont. 394, 421 P.2d 449 (1966), is a foundational Montana authority distinguishing diminished earning capacity from actual wage loss.

Earning-capacity evidence can include:

  • age
  • pre-injury health
  • occupation
  • education
  • training
  • skills
  • employment history
  • pre-injury earnings
  • overtime history
  • promotion path
  • physical restrictions
  • cognitive restrictions
  • remaining work life
  • vocational evidence
  • economic evidence
A person may return to work and still lose earning capacity. Continued employment does not necessarily answer whether the injury reduced future access to overtime, promotions, physically demanding work, occupational choices or other earning opportunities.

Magart: the future loss must still be proved

Magart v. Schank, 2000 MT 279, illustrates the opposite side of the rule. Evidence of an injury does not compel an earning-capacity award if the claimed future occupational loss is not sufficiently established.

Human losses are compensable even though they do not generate invoices

Montana recognizes legally compensable personal losses that cannot be measured by simply adding receipts.

Pain and suffering

Evidence can include the nature, severity, frequency and duration of pain; invasive treatment; medication; sleep interruption; movement limits; and the effect of symptoms on daily life.

Mental and emotional suffering

Where causally supported, evidence can include anxiety, fear, trauma reactions, depression, humiliation, sleep disruption and other emotional effects of the injury.

Loss of established course of life

Montana recognizes impairment of the ability to pursue a person's established activities and chosen way of life as a distinct category when the evidence supports the required lasting injury.

Rasmussen v. Sibert, 153 Mont. 286, 456 P.2d 835 (1969), recognized reasonable compensation for destruction of the capacity to pursue an established course of life in a permanent-injury case.

Henricksen v. State, 2004 MT 20, further explains that this category concerns impairment of the person's chosen pursuits and is conceptually different from diminished earning capacity.

Do not duplicate the same human loss under several labels. Pain, emotional distress and alteration of established course of life can involve overlapping facts. The proof should identify the actual distinct harm rather than counting the same consequence repeatedly.

Build a specific before-and-after life record

Before

What was ordinary life?

Document work, exercise, recreation, household duties, family roles, travel, sleep, hobbies, independence and everyday routines.

After

What objectively changed?

Identify activities stopped, reduced, modified or performed with pain, together with frequency, duration and the reason for the change.

Potential corroborating sources:

  • injured person's testimony
  • spouse or partner
  • family
  • friends
  • coworkers
  • supervisors
  • activity partners
  • photographs
  • video
  • calendars
  • travel records
  • exercise data
  • contemporaneous notes
  • medical records
  • therapy records

Vehicle damage has a separate Montana measure

Property damage should be calculated independently of bodily-injury damages.

Repairable vehicle

Preserve the repair estimate, supplements, invoices, parts, labor, hidden-damage documentation, photographs, towing, storage and qualifying loss-of-use evidence.

Total loss: current MCA § 27-1-306

When the cost to repair a motor vehicle exceeds its value, current § 27-1-306 measures damages by the vehicle's actual replacement value.

The statute defines actual replacement value as the vehicle's actual cash value immediately before the damage.

Book or guide values are evidence. They do not automatically establish the vehicle's statutory actual replacement value. Current Montana law allows qualifying book-value information to assist in determining actual replacement value.

Current § 27-1-306 defines “book” value by reference to current used-car value and pricing information published by an organization nationally recognized for providing that information.

Evidence bearing on actual pre-loss value may include:

  • year, make and model
  • trim level
  • mileage
  • pre-loss condition
  • options
  • equipment
  • maintenance history
  • prior damage history
  • comparable vehicles
  • market evidence
  • recognized valuation sources

Loss of use can be different from the vehicle's physical damage

Montana has long recognized qualifying damages for the loss of use of a motor vehicle during a reasonable repair or replacement period.

Gammel v. Dees

Gammel v. Dees, 161 Mont. 159, 505 P.2d 122 (1972), recognizes the general principle that loss of use is limited by a reasonable repair or replacement period.

In Gammel, the claimant actually obtained a replacement automobile the day after the crash. The Supreme Court therefore rejected a separate claimed loss-of-use award on those facts.

Loss of use requires evidence of actual deprivation and a reasonable period. Preserve rental bills, transportation expenses, replacement efforts, repair delays and reasons a substitute vehicle was or was not reasonably available.

Gross damages and recoverable damages are not always the same number

After determining legally compensable losses, Montana comparative-negligence law can reduce the amount ultimately recoverable.

Under MCA § 27-1-702, claimant negligence reduces damages in proportion to the assigned percentage and can bar the negligence recovery if claimant negligence exceeds the operative statutory threshold.

Example: if legally compensable damages equal $100,000 and the claimant is assigned 20% negligence, the tort recovery ordinarily is reduced by the claimant's comparative percentage before other legally applicable adjustments.

Montana expects reasonable mitigation—not unreasonable sacrifice

An injured person has a duty to take reasonable steps to avoid unnecessarily increasing damages.

Montana's classic formulation asks what an ordinarily prudent person, capable of acting under the circumstances, reasonably would be expected to do.

Spackman v. Ralph M. Parsons Co.

Spackman v. Ralph M. Parsons Co., 147 Mont. 500, 414 P.2d 918 (1966), recognizes the positive duty to mitigate but emphasizes its limits: mitigation does not require conduct that is unreasonable or places health in danger.

Mitigation means reasonable conduct—not perfection. The question is what an ordinarily prudent person reasonably could be expected to do under the actual circumstances.

Crash disputes can involve:

  • following reasonable medical advice
  • attending recommended treatment
  • addressing avoidable treatment gaps
  • returning to work when medically reasonable
  • seeking suitable replacement work when appropriate
  • limiting avoidable towing or storage charges
  • taking reasonable steps toward property repair or replacement
A treatment gap does not prove failure to mitigate. Cost, lack of insurance, transportation, provider availability, medical advice, another illness or other facts may explain a gap. Document the reason.

Tort medical damages, provider balances and reimbursement claims are separate calculations

Current § 27-1-308 addresses what medical-service damages can be recovered from the tortfeasor.

It does not eliminate every independently valid reimbursement or subrogation right.

Keep three numbers separate: the medical amount recoverable as tort damages, the amount legally owed to a medical provider, and the amount a health plan, government program, MedPay carrier or other payer may seek in reimbursement.

Section 27-1-308 expressly preserves subrogation rights specifically granted by state law, federal law or contract.

Montana's made-whole and reimbursement rules are addressed separately in the MedPay & Subrogation guide.

Pretrial medical payments by the defendant or liability insurer also require accounting

MCA § 27-1-308 provides that when the defendant, defendant's insurer or authorized representative pays part of the plaintiff's medical financial obligation before trial, the court makes the statutory adjustment before entry of judgment.

Do not count the same compensable medical obligation twice. Maintain a ledger showing who paid each obligation, when it was paid and whether any repayment right attaches.

A serious injury can produce legally distinct family losses

Montana recognizes consortium interests in appropriate circumstances. Those claims concern injury to the relationship rather than simply adding another medical expense to the injured person's damages.

Proof can include effects on:

  • companionship
  • affection
  • assistance
  • household partnership
  • caregiving
  • family roles
  • physical intimacy
Derivative claims require their own legal analysis. Do not assume every family consequence automatically creates an independent recoverable claim.

Punitive damages require much more than ordinary negligent driving

MCA § 27-1-221 permits punitive damages when the defendant is proven guilty of actual fraud or actual malice under Montana's statutory definitions.

All elements must be established by clear and convincing evidence.

Current Montana procedure also prohibits including a punitive-damages request in the initial pleading. After discovery has begun, a party must seek court permission to amend and submit specific facts supported by admissible evidence sufficient to establish a triable punitive-damages issue.

Serious injury does not itself create punitive liability. Ordinary negligence—even negligence producing catastrophic harm—does not automatically satisfy Montana's actual-malice or actual-fraud standard.

Some calculable tort damages can carry prejudgment interest

MCA § 27-1-210 provides prejudgment interest to a prevailing claimant on qualifying tort damages capable of being made certain by calculation.

The statutory mechanism requires a written statement to the opposing party or agent stating the claim and explaining how the specific sum was calculated.

The statutory interest period begins 30 days after presentation of the qualifying written calculation. The interest rate is the Federal Reserve prime rate specified by the statute, plus 3%, with the applicable annual rate determined under § 27-1-210.

The statute excludes inherently non-calculable damages, including:

  • future damages until incurred
  • pain and suffering
  • mental anguish or suffering
  • punitive damages
  • loss of established way of life
  • loss of consortium
  • attorney fees
A precise damages statement can have consequences beyond negotiation. For qualifying calculable losses, documentation and timing can affect prejudgment interest.

Citizen damages-development workflow

Separate liability from damages. Determine how the crash happened and who caused it separately from measuring the resulting losses.
Create a medical chronology. Record providers, dates, diagnoses, procedures, restrictions, symptoms and future recommendations.
Create a medical-payment ledger. Track billed amount, contractual adjustment, amount paid, payer, remaining legally payable amount and reimbursement claims.
Establish medical causation. Identify which conditions were caused or aggravated by the crash and distinguish unrelated conditions.
Document future medical care. Obtain support for expected treatment, frequency, duration and a current-law measure of financial cost.
Document past income loss. Preserve payroll, tax records, leave records, employer verification, schedules and evidence connecting the absence to the injury.
Evaluate diminished earning capacity separately. For lasting impairment, assess occupation, age, skills, restrictions, career path and whether vocational or economic analysis is warranted.
Create a before-and-after life inventory. Record specific activities, relationships, duties and routines changed by the injury.
Document property damage separately. Preserve valuation reports, repair estimates, photographs, rental expenses, towing, storage and comparable-vehicle information.
Identify reimbursement and lien interests. Track health plans, Medicare, Medicaid, MedPay, workers' compensation and other possible reimbursement sources.
Apply comparative negligence. Gross proven damages do not necessarily equal the final tort recovery.
Address mitigation issues. Document why treatment, employment or property-management decisions were reasonable.
Identify calculable damages for § 27-1-210. Determine whether a qualifying written damages statement should identify sums capable of calculation.
Update the damages file as the claim develops. Treatment, work capacity, future recommendations, payments and liens change over time.
Do not settle before the future is reasonably understood. Evaluate future care, earning capacity, UM/UIM, liens, reimbursement and unresolved injury issues before a general release closes the claim.

Build a damages ledger

Category Evidence to maintain
Past medical Provider, treatment dates, causation, billed amount, adjustment, amount paid, payer and legally unpaid balance.
Future medical Provider recommendation, expected care, frequency or duration, medical foundation and supportable statutory cost.
Past earnings Employer, work missed, wage rate, overtime, benefits, leave, payroll and tax evidence.
Earning capacity Restrictions, age, career history, education, skills, vocational evidence and economic analysis.
Pain / symptoms Duration, frequency, severity, medications, procedures, functional impact and corroborating evidence.
Emotional harm Symptoms, sleep, anxiety, trauma effects, treatment and corroboration.
Established course of life Specific before-and-after activities, routines, relationships and limitations.
Vehicle / property Repair, actual replacement value, loss of use, towing, storage and other personal-property loss.
Reimbursement Health insurance, MedPay, Medicare, Medicaid, workers' compensation and other lien or subrogation claims.
Comparative negligence Potential percentage reduction and evidence supporting or opposing it.
Prejudgment interest Calculable damage, written statement, calculation, delivery date and supporting documentation.

Common Montana crash-damages mistakes

  • Valuing the claim from the available policy limit.
  • Using a generic multiplier of medical bills.
  • Using pre-2021 medical-damages law for a modern claim.
  • Adding the face amount of written-off medical charges.
  • Failing to separate billed, adjusted, paid and legally owing medical amounts.
  • Ignoring insurance or public-program limitations governing unpaid medical charges.
  • Failing to document why treatment was reasonable, necessary and crash-related.
  • Claiming future medical care without an adequate evidentiary foundation.
  • Treating missed wages and diminished earning capacity as the same loss.
  • Failing to document overtime, benefits, promotion or career consequences.
  • Describing every human loss only as “pain and suffering.”
  • Double counting overlapping noneconomic damages.
  • Using a book value as the automatic total-loss measure.
  • Ignoring the 2025 wording of § 27-1-306.
  • Failing to document reasonable loss of use.
  • Ignoring mitigation issues.
  • Ignoring subrogation, liens and reimbursement.
  • Confusing tort medical damages with provider balances.
  • Ignoring comparative-negligence reductions.
  • Automatically labeling serious negligence “punitive.”
  • Ignoring potentially available § 27-1-210 prejudgment interest.
  • Signing a general release while future losses remain unresolved.

Montana authority map

Primary Law · MCA §§ 27-1-201, 27-1-202 & 27-1-317 Detriment and compensatory damages

Montana's general damages framework recognizes legally caused loss or harm and measures tort damages by the detriment proximately caused, subject to specific statutory limitations.

Primary Law · MCA § 27-1-203 Future detriment

Allows recovery for qualifying detriment that occurs after suit begins or is sufficiently certain to result in the future.

Primary Law · MCA §§ 27-1-302 & 27-1-308 Current medical-services damages

For modern bodily-injury and death claims, limits recoverable medical damages to qualifying amounts actually paid, still legally owing, or necessary for future care and restricts admissible charge evidence.

Legislation · Ch. 327, Laws of 2021 April 30, 2021 dividing line

Senate Bill 251 materially changed Montana's medical-damages framework for claims accruing on or after its effective date.

Montana Supreme Court Meek v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 2015 MT 130

Important pre-2021 medical-damages authority. It must not be converted into the governing rule for a claim accruing after the Legislature's 2021 statutory change.

Montana Supreme Court Gibson v. United States, 2021 MT 309

Confirms the old-law/new-law date distinction. Gibson's underlying claim accrued before § 27-1-308's 2021 change, so the Supreme Court applied the prior framework to the certified questions.

Montana Supreme Court Thomas v. Whiteside, 148 Mont. 394, 421 P.2d 449 (1966)

Foundational authority distinguishing impairment of future earning capacity from wages already lost.

Montana Supreme Court Magart v. Schank, 2000 MT 279

Automobile-injury authority demonstrating that a diminished earning-capacity award still requires sufficient evidence that the claimed future occupational loss is reasonably established.

Montana Supreme Court Rasmussen v. Sibert, 153 Mont. 286, 456 P.2d 835 (1969)

Recognizes pain-and-suffering damages and compensation for destruction of the ability to pursue an established course of life in a qualifying permanent-injury case.

Montana Supreme Court Henricksen v. State, 2004 MT 20

Explains that impairment of the ability to pursue an established course of life is conceptually separate from diminished earning capacity and can coexist with separately proven emotional-distress damages.

Montana Supreme Court Murray v. Whitcraft, 2012 MT 298

Motor-vehicle damages case emphasizing the claimant's burden to prove that requested damages were caused by the crash and supporting the factfinder's role where medical causation and extent of damages are disputed.

Primary Law · MCA § 27-1-306 Motor-vehicle total loss — 2025 statutory text

When repair cost exceeds vehicle value, uses actual replacement value, defined as actual cash value immediately before the damage. Qualifying nationally recognized used-car pricing information may assist but does not automatically control.

Montana Supreme Court Gammel v. Dees, 161 Mont. 159, 505 P.2d 122 (1972)

Vehicle-property authority addressing qualifying loss-of-use damages during the reasonable repair or replacement period and rejecting a claimed loss-of-use award where the claimant obtained a replacement automobile the following day.

Montana Supreme Court Spackman v. Ralph M. Parsons Co., 147 Mont. 500, 414 P.2d 918 (1966)

States Montana's traditional mitigation standard: the injured person must act reasonably, but the duty does not require unreasonable action or conduct endangering health.

Primary Law · MCA § 27-1-702 Comparative negligence

Can proportionately reduce or, beyond the statutory threshold, bar a negligence recovery even after gross damages are otherwise established.

Primary Law · MCA §§ 27-1-220 & 27-1-221 Punitive damages

Require actual fraud or actual malice, clear-and-convincing proof and compliance with Montana's special procedure before a punitive-damages claim may be added to the case.

Primary Law · MCA § 27-1-210 Prejudgment interest

Provides interest on qualifying tort damages capable of calculation beginning 30 days after presentation of the required written claim and calculation, at the statutory prime-rate-plus-3% rate, while excluding listed noneconomic and future categories.

Source-control rule: Current Montana statutes and official court opinions control. This guide summarizes the law for public education; verify the operative policy, statute, complete opinion, and current treatment before legal reliance.

Frequently asked questions

Are my medical damages equal to the original amounts shown on my hospital bills?

Not automatically. For claims accruing on or after April 30, 2021, MCA § 27-1-308 limits the recoverable and admissible medical-services amounts and excludes qualifying discounts, reductions and writeoffs from the jury's measure.

Why does April 30, 2021 matter?

Montana's Legislature materially changed the medical-services damages framework for claims accruing on or after that date. Older cases therefore must be used carefully.

Can I recover future medical expenses?

Potentially. The care must be sufficiently supported as reasonable, necessary and causally related, and the amount remains subject to the current § 27-1-308 rules.

Is loss of earning capacity the same as missed paychecks?

No. Past lost earnings concern income already missed. Earning capacity concerns a lasting reduction in the person's ability to earn in the future.

Can I have an earning-capacity claim even if I returned to work?

Potentially. Continued employment does not necessarily answer whether injury reduced access to overtime, advancement, heavier work, a particular profession or future earning opportunities.

Does Montana use a medical-bill multiplier for pain and suffering?

No universal Montana statute or rule establishes such a multiplier. Noneconomic damages depend on proof of the nature, severity, duration and human consequences of the injury.

What is loss of established course of life?

It concerns qualifying impairment of the person's ability to pursue the activities and chosen way of life established before a lasting injury. It is different from diminished earning capacity.

If my vehicle is totaled, does the insurer have to use a particular book value?

No. Current MCA § 27-1-306 uses actual replacement value, defined as the vehicle's actual cash value immediately before the damage. A qualifying nationally recognized book or guide value may assist but does not automatically control unless the parties agree after the loss to use book value.

Can I recover for being without my vehicle?

Montana recognizes qualifying loss-of-use damages during a reasonable repair or replacement period. The actual period and amount must be proven.

Does health insurance paying my medical bills eliminate my tort claim?

No. But current § 27-1-308 determines the recoverable medical-services amount, and reimbursement or subrogation rights must be analyzed separately.

What happens if I am partly at fault?

Montana's comparative-negligence statute can reduce otherwise recoverable damages according to the claimant's percentage and can bar recovery when claimant negligence exceeds the statutory threshold.

Does a gap in treatment automatically destroy my claim?

No. It may raise causation or mitigation questions, but legitimate reasons such as cost, insurance access, transportation, provider availability or medical advice can explain the interruption.

Does every severe crash support punitive damages?

No. Montana requires actual fraud or actual malice under a heightened statutory standard. Ordinary negligence does not automatically qualify.

Can prejudgment interest apply before the case is decided?

Section 27-1-210 can award prejudgment interest on qualifying calculable tort damages beginning 30 days after presentation of the required written claim and calculation. Listed noneconomic and future damages are excluded.

Build damages from evidence—not from a settlement formula.

Connect every claimed loss to the collision. Use Montana's current medical-expense statute. Separate billed charges from amounts paid and legally owing. Distinguish past income loss from diminished earning capacity. Build a concrete before-and-after life record. Value the actual vehicle, not merely a database number. Account for comparative negligence, mitigation, reimbursement and prejudgment interest. Then evaluate the complete damages picture before signing a release.

Public legal education only. This page does not create an attorney-client relationship and is not individualized legal advice. Damages depend on causation, the accrual date, current Montana statutes, medical evidence, employment evidence, property valuation, comparative negligence, mitigation, insurance, reimbursement rights and the facts of the individual loss. Montana's medical-expense rules changed materially effective April 30, 2021, and Montana's motor-vehicle replacement-value statute was amended in 2025. Older decisions therefore must be used with attention to the operative statutory version. Serious injury, permanent impairment, future-care and substantial earning-capacity claims commonly require individualized medical, vocational, economic or legal analysis. Verify current statutes, complete official opinions, applicable jury instructions and current treatment before legal reliance.