1-2-106. Construction of words and phrases. Words and phrases used in the statutes of Montana are construed according to the context and the approved usage of the language, but technical words and phrases and such others as have acquired a peculiar and appropriate meaning in law or are defined in chapter 1, part 2, as amended, are to be construed according to such peculiar and appropriate meaning or definition.
Montana Code Annotated
Mont. Code Ann. § 1-2-106 (2026)
Construction Of Words And Phrases
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MT-LEGleg.mt.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
TITLE 1. GENERAL LAWS AND DEFINITIONS
CHAPTER 2. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
Part 1. General Provisions
Construction Of Words And Phrases
History: En. Sec. 15, Pol. C. 1895; re-en. Sec. 15, Rev. C. 1907; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 4, L. 1921; re-en. Sec. 15, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Pol. C. Sec. 16; re-en. Sec. 15, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 19-102.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46
cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Orr v. State, 2004 MT 354 (Mont. 2004).
Orr v. State, 2004 MT 354 (Mont. 2004). “Section 1-2-106, MCA. Therefore, when interpreting statutes, this Court will use the plain and ordinary meaning of a word.”
Clark Fork Coalition v. Montana Wel, 2016 MT 229 (Mont. 2016). “Section 1-2-106, MCA. “When the legislature has not defined a statutory term, we consider the term to have its plain and ordinary meaning.”
Mydlarz v. Palmer/Duncan Constr. Co., 682 P.2d 695 (Mont. 1984). “Section 1-2-106, MCA. When construing a statute as a whole, the intent of the legislature should be pursued.”
Haugen v. Blaine Bank of Montana, 926 P.2d 1364 (Mont. 1996). “As Justice McDonough pointed out in his dissent in Livingston , [t]he language of the rule clearly and unequivocally requires the dismissal of lawsuits when the return of service fails to be "filed with the Clerk of Court within three years after the commencement of said action.”
State v. Bobby Cooksey, 2012 MT 226 (Mont. 2012). “” (brackets and internal quotation marks omitted)); § 1-2-106, MCA (“Words and phrases used in the statutes of Montana are construed according to the context and the approved usage of the language .”
State v. Montoya, 1999 MT 180 (Mont. 1999). “” Section 1-2-106, MCA (technical words and phrases that have acquired a “peculiar and appropriate meaning in the law” are to be construed according to such particularized meaning or definition).”
State v. R. Collins, 2023 MT 78 (Mont. 2023). “Section 1-2-106, MCA; Mt. Water Co. v. Mont.”
Richter v. Rose, 1998 MT 165 (Mont. 1998). “See § 1-2-106, MCA; State v. Nye (1997), 283 Mont.”
Jarussi v. Bd. of Trs. of Sch. Dist. No. 28, 664 P.2d 316 (Mont. 1983). “” The appropriate guide to determine the meaning of words and phrases is section 1-2-106, MCA. The statute reads: “Construction of words and phrases.”
Baitis v. Dep't of Revenue of State, 2004 MT 17 (Mont. 2004). “Section 1-2-106, MCA. The duty of a judge is to look at the words of the statute and ascribe to them their plain meaning.”
Carroll v. W. R. Grace & Co., 830 P.2d 1253 (Mont. 1992). “General rules of statutory construction require this Court to interpret the statutory language before us, without adding to, or subtracting from, it. Section 1-2-101, MCA.”
Murray v. BEJ Minerals, 2020 MT 131 (Mont. 2020). “Dissent, ¶ 7; see also § 1-2-106, MCA (“Words and phrases used in the statutes of Montana are construed according to the context and the approved usage of the language .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.