Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 2. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION · CHAPTER 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS · Part 2. Open Meetings
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 2-3-221 (2026)

Costs To Prevailing Party In Certain Actions To Enforce Constitutional Right To Know

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 2
  3. CHAPTER 3
  4. Part 2
  5. 2-3-221 Costs to prevailing party in certain actions to enforce constitutional right to know

TITLE 2. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN GOVERNMENTAL OPERATIONS

Part 2. Open Meetings

Costs To Prevailing Party In Certain Actions To Enforce Constitutional Right To Know

2-3-221. Costs to prevailing party in certain actions to enforce constitutional right to know. A person alleging a deprivation of rights who prevails in an action brought in district court to enforce the person's rights under Article II, section 9, of the Montana constitution may be awarded costs and reasonable attorney fees.

History: En. 93-8632 by Sec. 1, Ch. 493, L. 1975; R.C.M. 1947, 93-8632; amd. Sec. 39, Ch. 61, L. 2007; amd. Sec. 30, Ch. 348, L. 2015.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: In Re Petition of Billings High Sch. Dist. No. 2 v. Gazette, 2006 MT 329 (Mont. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Petition of Billings High Sch. Dist. No. 2 v. Gazette, 2006 MT 329 (Mont. 2006). · cites it 70× “Section 2-3-221, MCA, provides that "[a] plaintiff who prevails in an action brought in district court to enforce his rights under Article II, section 9, of the Montana constitution may be awarded his costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.”
Gaustad ex rel. M.G. v. City of Columbus, 877 P.2d 470 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 37× “Cynthia Gaustad (Gaustad) appeals from an order of the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Stillwater County, denying her motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA, after she prevailed in obtaining the inspection of an investigative file held by the City of Columbus.”
Yellowstone Cnty. v. Billings Gazette, 2006 MT 218 (Mont. 2006). · cites it 27× “2d 470, 472 (where we reviewed the legislative history leading to the adoption of § 2-3-221, MCA, and concluded that "the clear intent of the statute is that an award of attorney's fees is discretionary" and accordingly does not mandate attorney fee awards for prevailing parties…”
Havre Daily News, LLC v. City of Havre, 2006 MT 215 (Mont. 2006). · cites it 14× “Havre 26 argues that the Newspaper did not prevail in the District Court, so it cannot recover attorney fees pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA. Havre contends that the Newspaper did not bring this action to enforce its constitutional right to know, because Winderl had already viewed a…”
Bozeman Daily Chronicle v. City of Bozeman Police Dep't, 859 P.2d 435 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 21× “The Complaint and Petition alleged that the failure to release that information violated Article II, Section 9 of the Montana Constitution.”
Motta v. Philipsburg Sch. Bd. Trs., Dist. 1, 2004 MT 256 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 19× “Did the District Court abuse its discretion when it did not award costs to Motta pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA? FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND ¶5 Motta brought this action on March 12,2001, in the Third Judicial District Court, claiming that the School District violated various…”
Matter of Investigative Records, 877 P.2d 470 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 37× “Cynthia Gaustad (Gaustad) appeals from an order of the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Stillwater County, denying her motion for attorney's fees pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA, after she prevailed in obtaining the inspection of an investigative file held by the City of Columbus.”
Associated Press, Inc. v. Montana Dep't of Revenue, 2000 MT 160 (Mont. 2000). · cites it 18× “An award of reasonable attorney fees and costs to Appellants pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA. 5. Any other relief the District Court deems just and proper.”
Citizens for Balanced Use v. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Park Comm'n, 2014 MT 214 (Mont. 2014). · cites it 26× “” Section 2-3-221, MCA (emphasis added). A district court’s determination to award attorney’s fees and costs under § 2-3-221, MCA, is discretionary.”
Matter of Investigative Records of City of Columbus Police Dept., 901 P.2d 565 (Mont. 1995). · cites it 13× “We remanded the order holding that 1) an award of attorney fees pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA, is discretionary rather than mandatory; and 2) remand was appropriate because the denial of attorney fees lacked sufficient explanation or rationale and new case law was available…”
SJL of Montana Assocs. Ltd. P'ship v. City of Billings, 867 P.2d 1084 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 12× “Did the District Court abuse its discretion in denying KTVQ's request for attorney's fees pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA? 3. Although the District Court determined that KTVQ's request for an injunction was moot, does the controversy continue under the standard "capable of…”
Krakauer v. State Ex Rel. Comm'r of Higher Educ., 2016 MT 230 (Mont. 2016). · cites it 4× “The Court nonetheless fails to find that the Commissioner’s actions in following both federal and state law within the context of a discretionary award of attorney fees pursuant to § 2-3-221, MCA, does not warrant a conclusion that Krakauer be responsible for his own fees and…”
Show all 33 citing cases →
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.