11 Montana opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Montana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. McNallygreen2 sentences2017We have held that “if another state’s [DUI] law allows a person to be convicted using a lesser standard than would be required in Montana for a conviction, the statutes are not similar for purposes of § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA.” State v. Polaski, 2005 MT 13, ¶ 22 , 325 Mont. 351 , 106 P.3d 538 ; accord State v. McNally, 2002 MT 160, ¶ 22 , 310 Mont. 396 , 50 P.3d 1080 . 2017We have held that “if another state’s [DUI] law allows a person to be convicted using a lesser standard than would be required in Montana for a conviction, the statutes are not similar for purposes of § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA.” State v. Polaski, 2005 MT 13, ¶ 22 , 325 Mont. 351 , 106 P.3d 538 ; accord State v. McNally, 2002 MT 160, ¶ 22 , 310 Mont. 396 , 50 P.3d 1080 . | 1 | 2 |
Formicove, Inc. v. Burlington Northern, Inc.green2 sentences2025Stare decisis is “a fundamental doctrine which reflects our concerns for stability, predictability and equal treatment[.]” Formicove, Inc. v. Burlington Northern, Inc., 207 Mont. 189, 194 , 673 P.2d 469, 472 (1983). 2025Stare decisis is “a fundamental doctrine which reflects our concerns for stability, predictability and equal treatment[.]” Formicove, Inc. v. Burlington Northern, Inc., 207 Mont. 189, 194 , 673 P.2d 469, 472 (1983). | 1 | 1 |
Barrett v. Holland & Hartgreen2 sentences2014Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 cmt. a (actual fraud involves “intent to deceive,” whereas negligent misrepresentation involves “good faith coupled with negligence”); Falls Sand & Gravel, 270 F. Supp. at 501 (“an action for negligent misrepresentation is quite different from an action for intentional fraudulent and deceitful misrepresentation, since there is no requirement of scienter”); Barrett, 256 Mont. at 107 , 845 P.2d at 717 (“Negligent misrepresentation has a lesser standard of proof than [actual] fraud. 2014Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 cmt. a (actual fraud involves “intent to deceive,” whereas negligent misrepresentation involves “good faith coupled with negligence”); Falls Sand & Gravel, 270 F. Supp. at 501 (“an action for negligent misrepresentation is quite different from an action for intentional fraudulent and deceitful misrepresentation, since there is no requirement of scienter”); Barrett, 256 Mont. at 107 , 845 P.2d at 717 (“Negligent misrepresentation has a lesser standard of proof than [actual] fraud. | 1 | 1 |
Falls Sand and Gravel Co. v. Western Concrete, Inc.green2 sentences2014Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 cmt. a (actual fraud involves “intent to deceive,” whereas negligent misrepresentation involves “good faith coupled with negligence”); Falls Sand & Gravel, 270 F. Supp. at 501 (“an action for negligent misrepresentation is quite different from an action for intentional fraudulent and deceitful misrepresentation, since there is no requirement of scienter”); Barrett, 256 Mont. at 107 , 845 P.2d at 717 (“Negligent misrepresentation has a lesser standard of proof than [actual] fraud. 2014Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552 cmt. a (actual fraud involves “intent to deceive,” whereas negligent misrepresentation involves “good faith coupled with negligence”); Falls Sand & Gravel, 270 F. Supp. at 501 (“an action for negligent misrepresentation is quite different from an action for intentional fraudulent and deceitful misrepresentation, since there is no requirement of scienter”); Barrett, 256 Mont. at 107 , 845 P.2d at 717 (“Negligent misrepresentation has a lesser standard of proof than [actual] fraud. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Copeltongreen2 sentences2008State v. Copelton, 2006 MT 182, ¶ 10 , 333 Mont. 91, ¶ 10 , 140 P.3d 1074, ¶ 10 (citation omitted). ¶15 A search of a probationer’s residence or effects, however, may be conducted without a search warrant and pursuant to the lesser standard of “reasonable cause,” rather than probable cause. 2008State v. Copelton, 2006 MT 182, ¶ 10 , 333 Mont. 91, ¶ 10 , 140 P.3d 1074, ¶ 10 (citation omitted). ¶15 A search of a probationer’s residence or effects, however, may be conducted without a search warrant and pursuant to the lesser standard of “reasonable cause,” rather than probable cause. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Burkegreen2 sentences2006The fact that the probationer’s expectation of privacy is “diminished” (¶ 19 of the Court’s Opinion) merelyjustifi.es the lesser standard of “reasonable grounds” approved by the Supreme Court in Griffin and Knights and adopted by this Court in State v. Burke, 235 Mont. 165, 169-71 , 766 P.2d 254, 256-57 (1988). 2006The fact that the probationer’s expectation of privacy is “diminished” (¶ 19 of the Court’s Opinion) merelyjustifi.es the lesser standard of “reasonable grounds” approved by the Supreme Court in Griffin and Knights and adopted by this Court in State v. Burke, 235 Mont. 165, 169-71 , 766 P.2d 254, 256-57 (1988). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Montana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Polaski
green
2 sentences2017We have held that “if another state’s [DUI] law allows a person to be convicted using a lesser standard than would be required in Montana for a conviction, the statutes are not similar for purposes of § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA.” State v. Polaski, 2005 MT 13, ¶ 22 , 325 Mont. 351 , 106 P.3d 538 ; accord State v. McNally, 2002 MT 160, ¶ 22 , 310 Mont. 396 , 50 P.3d 1080 . 2017We have held that “if another state’s [DUI] law allows a person to be convicted using a lesser standard than would be required in Montana for a conviction, the statutes are not similar for purposes of § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA.” State v. Polaski, 2005 MT 13, ¶ 22 , 325 Mont. 351 , 106 P.3d 538 ; accord State v. McNally, 2002 MT 160, ¶ 22 , 310 Mont. 396 , 50 P.3d 1080 . | 2 | 2017–2020 |
Apprendi v. New Jersey
green
1 sentence2026Apprendi 530 U.S. at 476 , 120 S. Ct. at 2355 . ¶19 Here, similar to Apprendi, the DOJ seeks to establish an essential fact, the age of the victim, under a lesser standard of proof—probable cause—than the required burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt or by the defendant’s own admission and thus impose a harsher sentence than the court in North Dakota actually imposed upon Cooper. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Estate of Willson v. Addison
green
2 sentences2023Peter’s Hosp., 2017 MT 298, ¶ 20 , 389 Mont. 449 , 406 P.3d 932 ; Estate of Willson v. Addison, 2011 MT 179, ¶¶ 17-18 , 361 Mont. 269 , 258 P.3d 410 . 19 209-10 (1990) (distinguishing “‘national’ specialist standard” applicable without regard for “geographical limitations” to “any physician who holds himself or herself out” as a “board-certified specialist[] or board-certified general or family practitioner[]” from the lesser standard of care for “non-board-certified general practitioner[s],” i.e., “the standard of care of a “reasonably competent general practitioner acting in the same or simi 2023Peter’s Hosp., 2017 MT 298, ¶ 20 , 389 Mont. 449 , 406 P.3d 932 ; Estate of Willson v. Addison, 2011 MT 179, ¶¶ 17-18 , 361 Mont. 269 , 258 P.3d 410 . 19 209-10 (1990) (distinguishing “‘national’ specialist standard” applicable without regard for “geographical limitations” to “any physician who holds himself or herself out” as a “board-certified specialist[] or board-certified general or family practitioner[]” from the lesser standard of care for “non-board-certified general practitioner[s],” i.e., “the standard of care of a “reasonably competent general practitioner acting in the same or simi | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Horn v. St. Peter's Hospital
green
2 sentences2023Peter’s Hosp., 2017 MT 298, ¶ 20 , 389 Mont. 449 , 406 P.3d 932 ; Estate of Willson v. Addison, 2011 MT 179, ¶¶ 17-18 , 361 Mont. 269 , 258 P.3d 410 . 19 209-10 (1990) (distinguishing “‘national’ specialist standard” applicable without regard for “geographical limitations” to “any physician who holds himself or herself out” as a “board-certified specialist[] or board-certified general or family practitioner[]” from the lesser standard of care for “non-board-certified general practitioner[s],” i.e., “the standard of care of a “reasonably competent general practitioner acting in the same or simi 2023Peter’s Hosp., 2017 MT 298, ¶ 20 , 389 Mont. 449 , 406 P.3d 932 ; Estate of Willson v. Addison, 2011 MT 179, ¶¶ 17-18 , 361 Mont. 269 , 258 P.3d 410 . 19 209-10 (1990) (distinguishing “‘national’ specialist standard” applicable without regard for “geographical limitations” to “any physician who holds himself or herself out” as a “board-certified specialist[] or board-certified general or family practitioner[]” from the lesser standard of care for “non-board-certified general practitioner[s],” i.e., “the standard of care of a “reasonably competent general practitioner acting in the same or simi | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Calvert
green
2 sentences2022“In evaluating whether another state’s statutes are similar to Montana’s statutes, we compare the statutes in effect at the time the offense was committed.” Olson, ¶ 11 (citing State v. Calvert, 2013 MT 374, ¶ 8 , 373 Mont. 152 , 316 P.3d 173 ). 2022“In evaluating whether another state’s statutes are similar to Montana’s statutes, we compare the statutes in effect at the time the offense was committed.” Olson, ¶ 11 (citing State v. Calvert, 2013 MT 374, ¶ 8 , 373 Mont. 152 , 316 P.3d 173 ). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. P. Olson
neutral
2 sentences2022DISCUSSION ¶5 Did the District Court err by determining that Pankhurst’s two North Dakota convictions were sufficiently similar to constitute prior convictions under § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA? ¶6 Pankhurst argues that his two DUI convictions in North Dakota cannot be used as predicate offenses for felony enhancement under § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA, because the North Dakota statute allows a person to be convicted of DUI under a lesser standard of impairment than what Montana law requires.1 He asserts that North Dakota, unlike Montana, does not require a nexus between the consumption of an intoxicating 2022DISCUSSION ¶5 Did the District Court err by determining that Pankhurst’s two North Dakota convictions were sufficiently similar to constitute prior convictions under § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA? ¶6 Pankhurst argues that his two DUI convictions in North Dakota cannot be used as predicate offenses for felony enhancement under § 61-8-734(1)(a), MCA, because the North Dakota statute allows a person to be convicted of DUI under a lesser standard of impairment than what Montana law requires.1 He asserts that North Dakota, unlike Montana, does not require a nexus between the consumption of an intoxicating | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Barrett
green
2 sentences2020“Absent a factual 3 dispute, a decision on a motion to dismiss is an issue of law which we review de novo for correctness.” State v. Barrett, 2015 MT 303, ¶ 6 , 381 Mont. 299 , 358 P.3d 921 (citation omitted). ¶9 If another state’s law allows a person to be convicted using a lesser standard than Montana, then the statutes are not sufficiently similar for the purposes of enhancing a DUI sentence. 2020“Absent a factual 3 dispute, a decision on a motion to dismiss is an issue of law which we review de novo for correctness.” State v. Barrett, 2015 MT 303, ¶ 6 , 381 Mont. 299 , 358 P.3d 921 (citation omitted). ¶9 If another state’s law allows a person to be convicted using a lesser standard than Montana, then the statutes are not sufficiently similar for the purposes of enhancing a DUI sentence. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Smith
green
2 sentences2009State v. Smith, 2008 MT 7, ¶ 15 , 341 Mont. 82 , 176 P.3d 258 . 2009State v. Smith, 2008 MT 7, ¶ 15 , 341 Mont. 82 , 176 P.3d 258 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Kriesel
neutral
2 sentences2008Fritz , ¶ 10; State v. Kriesel, 2000 MT 144, ¶ 12 , 300 Mont. 44, ¶ 12 , 2 P.3d 831, ¶ 12 . 2008Fritz , ¶ 10; State v. Kriesel, 2000 MT 144, ¶ 12 , 300 Mont. 44, ¶ 12 , 2 P.3d 831, ¶ 12 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.