Montana Slip and Fall Settlement Calculator
Get a rough estimate of what a Montana slip-and-fall claim might be worth. Enter your medical bills and losses and answer a few plain questions — the tool weighs how provable the owner's fault is and your share of fault. This is an estimate to understand the factors, not a prediction or an offer.
This is a rough estimate, not a prediction or an offer.
Slip-and-fall claims turn on proving the property owner was at fault — there is no formula that predicts a settlement. This shows the factors and a wide range to help you understand value. Consult a Montana premises-liability attorney about your case.
Enter the medical bills and losses to see an estimated range
The multiplier method is a rough starting point, not a guarantee. Slip-and-fall value depends most on proving the owner's fault and on the available insurance. An attorney is the only way to value your specific claim. This tool is not legal advice and RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm.
How the Estimate Works
No tool can predict a slip-and-fall settlement. This calculator applies the multiplier method (pain and suffering as a multiple of your medical bills), then does something the thin online calculators skip: it weighs how provable the owner's fault is. A spill the staff caused or knew about is worth far more than a hazard nobody can show the owner knew about. It then estimates your own comparative fault from a few plain questions and applies Montana's rules.
Proving the Owner Was at Fault
Premises liability has four parts: a dangerous condition existed, the owner knew or should have known about it, they failed to fix it or warn you, and that caused your injury. The middle part — notice — is where most slip-and-fall cases are won or lost. Strong evidence (an incident report, photos of the hazard, surveillance video, cleaning and maintenance logs, prior complaints) is what turns a claim from a token offer into real money. A posted warning sign or cone works against you: it shows the owner did warn, and it makes the hazard "open and obvious," shifting fault onto you.
Montana Premises-Liability Rules
Open-and-obvious hazards. In Montana, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). Montana does NOT use open-and-obvious as a no-duty bar. In Richardson v. Corvallis Public School District No. 1, 286 Mont. 309, 950 P.2d 748 (1997), the Montana Supreme Court abolished entrant-status categories and adopted a single uniform duty of reasonable care, holding that a possessor may "no longer avoid liability simply because a dangerous activity or condition on the land is open and obvious." A landowner is absolved only if it should NOT have anticipated harm despite the obviousness; otherwise the obviousness of a hazard goes to the comparative-fault/foreseeability analysis (jury question on reasonable care), not to a threshold elimination of duty. Giving a flat "open and obvious" or natural-accumulation no-duty instruction is reversible error.
Ice and snow. Montana applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained walkway can support a claim. Montana rejects the natural-accumulation (Massachusetts) rule. Richardson v. Corvallis Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 1, 286 Mont. 309, 950 P.2d 748 (1997), expressly overruled prior case law distinguishing natural vs. altered accumulations of ice and snow, holding the possessor owes an ordinary duty to use reasonable care to keep the premises reasonably safe and to warn of hidden dangers — including naturally accumulated ice and snow. The trier of fact decides whether the landowner exercised reasonable care; a natural-accumulation no-duty instruction is reversible error.
Your Fault & the Deadline to File
Montana follows modified comparative negligence (51% bar). Your award is reduced by your share of fault, and you recover nothing once you are 51% or more at fault.
MCA 27-1-702 is a modified comparative negligence statute. A plaintiff may recover only if their contributory negligence/fault "was not greater than" the fault of the party (or combined parties) against whom recovery is sought — i.e., recovery is allowed up to and including 50% fault, but barred at 51% or more. Damages are reduced in proportion to the plaintiff's share of fault.
Montana generally requires a slip-and-fall lawsuit to be filed within 3 years of the fall (the statute of limitations). MCA 27-2-204(1): general tort/personal-injury actions ("liability not founded upon an instrument in writing") = 3 years. Shorter 2-year window applies to libel, slander, assault, battery, false imprisonment, or seduction (27-2-204(3)). Wrongful death generally 3 years (extended to 10 years where death results from homicide). Medical malpractice has its own SOL under MCA 27-2-205. Source: Richardson v. Corvallis Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 1, 286 Mont. 309, 950 P.2d 748 (1997) (uniform reasonable-care duty; abolishes open-and-obvious bar and natural-accumulation rule); MCA § 2-9-301 (Montana Tort Claims Act presentment prerequisite); MCA § 27-2-204 (3-year PI SOL); MCA § 27-1-702 (modified comparative negligence, 51% bar).
- Montana follows a single, uniform duty of reasonable care to ALL entrants (even trespassers) after Richardson v. Corvallis (1997) — there are no longer separate invitee/licensee/trespasser categories.
- An open and obvious hazard does NOT automatically defeat a slip-and-fall claim. The landowner can still be liable if it should have anticipated harm despite the obviousness; obviousness instead feeds the comparative-fault analysis.
- Montana rejects the 'natural accumulation' rule — owners owe a reasonable-care duty for naturally accumulated ice and snow, unlike Illinois or Ohio. A no-duty ice/snow instruction is reversible error.
- Recovery uses modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar (MCA 27-1-702): a plaintiff who is 51% or more at fault recovers nothing; otherwise damages are reduced by the plaintiff's share.
- Suing a government property owner requires first PRESENTING the claim (MCA 2-9-301); there is no 90/180-day notice trap, but the underlying 3-year personal-injury statute of limitations still applies.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much is my Montana slip and fall claim worth?
No one can tell you a number in advance, and slip-and-fall is harder than a car accident because you must prove the owner was at fault. A rough estimate adds your economic damages and a pain-and-suffering multiplier, discounts it by how provable the owner's fault is, and reduces it for your share of fault under Montana's modified comparative negligence (51% bar) rule. The available insurance also caps recovery — an attorney is the only way to value your specific case.
Does a "wet floor" sign hurt my Montana claim?
Yes, usually. A posted warning shows the owner satisfied part of their duty to warn and makes the hazard "open and obvious," which shifts fault onto you. In Montana, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). It reduces — and sometimes defeats — a claim, but not always (a hidden or inadequate sign may not help the owner).
Can I sue for a fall on ice or snow in Montana?
Montana applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained or unaddressed icy walkway can support a claim, subject to your own comparative fault. This is general information, not legal advice — consult a Montana attorney.
How long do I have to file in Montana?
Generally 3 years from the fall. MCA 27-2-204(1): general tort/personal-injury actions ("liability not founded upon an instrument in writing") = 3 years. Shorter 2-year window applies to libel, slander, assault, battery, false imprisonment, or seduction (27-2-204(3)). Wrongful death generally 3 years (extended to 10 years where death results from homicide). Medical malpractice has its own SOL under MCA 27-2-205.
Is this calculator accurate?
It is a rough estimate to show the factors that drive value — not a prediction or an offer. Slip-and-fall outcomes vary enormously and depend on proving fault and on the available insurance. Treat any number here as a ballpark and consult a Montana attorney.
Disclaimer
This estimator is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a prediction of any outcome. RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm. The value of a slip-and-fall claim can only be assessed by a licensed attorney reviewing your specific facts.