Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 2. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION · CHAPTER 4. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT · Part 6. Contested Cases
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-611 (2026)

Hearing Examiners -- Legal Services Unit -- Conduct Of Hearings -- Disqualification Of Hearing Examiners And Agency Members

✓ 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 4
  4. Part 6
  5. 2-4-611 Hearing examiners -- legal services unit -- conduct of hearings -- disqualification of hearing examiners and agency members

TITLE 2. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT

Part 6. Contested Cases

Hearing Examiners -- Legal Services Unit -- Conduct Of Hearings -- Disqualification Of Hearing Examiners And Agency Members

2-4-611. Hearing examiners -- legal services unit -- conduct of hearings -- disqualification of hearing examiners and agency members. (1) An agency may appoint hearing examiners for the conduct of hearings in contested cases. A hearing examiner must be assigned with due regard to the expertise required for the particular matter.

(2) An agency may elect to request a hearing examiner from an agency legal assistance program, if any, within the attorney general's office or from another agency. If the request is honored, the time, date, and place of the hearing must be set by the agency, with the concurrence of the legal assistance program or the other agency.

(3) Agency members or hearing examiners presiding over hearings may administer oaths or affirmations; issue subpoenas pursuant to 2-4-104; provide for the taking of testimony by deposition; regulate the course of hearings, including setting the time and place for continued hearings and fixing the time for filing of briefs or other documents; and direct parties to appear and confer to consider simplification of the issues by consent of the parties.

(4) On the filing by a party, hearing examiner, or agency member in good faith of a timely and sufficient affidavit of personal bias, lack of independence, disqualification by law, or other disqualification of a hearing examiner or agency member, the agency shall determine the matter as a part of the record and decision in the case. The agency may disqualify the hearing examiner or agency member and request another hearing examiner pursuant to subsection (2) or assign another hearing examiner from within the agency. The affidavit must state the facts and the reasons for the belief that the hearing examiner should be disqualified and must be filed not less than 10 days before the original date set for the hearing.

History: En. Sec. 11, Ch. 2, Ex. L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 82-4211(part); amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 467, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 3, L. 1985.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Goldstein v. Comm'n on Practice of the Supreme Court, 2000 MT 8 (Mont. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Goldstein v. Comm'n on Practice of the Supreme Court, 2000 MT 8 (Mont. 2000). · cites it 14× “Thus, other professionals in Montana are afforded a hearing examiner or "judge" assigned on the basis of his or her "expertise required for the particular matter," under § 2-4-611(1), MCA, or an independent hearing examiner selected from the attorney general's office or from…”
Steele v. McGregor, 1998 MT 85 (Mont. 1998). · cites it 12× “See §§ 2-4-611, 2-4-614(1)(f), and 2-4-623, MCA; see also §§ 39-51-2402 and 39-51-2403, MCA.”
N. Plains Resource Council v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 594 P.2d 297 (Mont. 1979). · cites it 6× “1947, now section 2-4-611(2) MCA, provides that hearings examiners shall be authorized to "regulate the course of hearings.”
Owens v. Montana Dep't of Revenue, 2007 MT 298 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 4× “¶ 6 Owens contested the revocation before a hearing examiner pursuant to § 2-4-611, MCA. Tom Sands (Sands), the former owner of the property, testified.”
City of Billings v. State Bd. of Labor Appeals, 663 P.2d 1167 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 6× “In a contested claim under MAPA, a hearing examiner may be appointed (section 2-4-611, MCA) who must proceed to a hearing (section 2-4-612, MCA).”
Wiser v. State, Dept. of Com., 2006 MT 20 (Mont. 2006). · cites it 3× “Section 2-4-611(4), MCA, allows a party to challenge the bias or independence of an agency member, and in such cases, requires the agency to include its determination as part of the record.”
Erickson v. State Ex Rel. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 938 P.2d 625 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 7× “On remand, the District Court relied on § 2-4-611(4), MCA, regarding the disqualification of hearing examiners, and decided that a person could reasonably question the hearing examiner’s impartiality in this case.”
Matter of Sorini, 717 P.2d 7 (Mont. 1986). · cites it 6× “Next, she argues that the Board gave extra consideration to the hearing examiner's recommendations because he was from the attorney general's office.”
Schneeman v. State, Dept. of Labor & Ind., 848 P.2d 504 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 5× “319, ARM, sets forth a procedure for the disqualification of an appeals referee pursuant to § 2-4-611, MCA. Section 2-4-611, MCA, provides in pertinent part: Hearing examiners - .”
Bostwick Props., Inc. v. Montana Dep't of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 2013 MT 48 (Mont. 2013). · cites it 2× “See § 2-4-611(4); § 85-2-310(1)(b), MCA; see also In re Best, 2010 MT 59, ¶ 22 , 355 Mont.”
Allied Waste Servs. of N. Am., LLC v. Mont. Dep't of Pub. Serv. Reg., 447 P.3d 463 (Mont. 2019). · cites it 2× “¶21 PSC and Big Foot have argued at length that the writ of mandate was issued in error because the District Court reached the issue prematurely, prior to briefing on the merits of the request, and failed to follow the applicable administrative procedures provided by MAPA,…”
Hawkins v. State, 2025 MT 134 (Mont. 2025). · cites it 5× “It is not a legislatively enacted statute, but a codification of a Supreme Court rule, which has no bearing on administrative agencies exercising their quasi-judicial functions.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-611(1): 2 cases
Goldstein v. Comm'n on Practice of the Supreme Court, 2000 MT 8 (Mont. 2000). “Thus, other professionals in Montana are afforded a hearing examiner or "judge" assigned on the basis of his or her "expertise required for the particular matter," under § 2-4-611(1), MCA, or an independent hearing examiner selected from the attorney general's office or from…”
Goldstein Albers v. Comm'n On, 2000 MT 8 (Mont. 2000).
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-611(2): 3 cases
N. Plains Resource Council v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 594 P.2d 297 (Mont. 1979). “1947, now section 2-4-611(2) MCA, provides that hearings examiners shall be authorized to "regulate the course of hearings.”
Goldstein v. Comm'n on Practice of the Supreme Court, 2000 MT 8 (Mont. 2000). “Thus, other professionals in Montana are afforded a hearing examiner or "judge" assigned on the basis of his or her "expertise required for the particular matter," under § 2-4-611(1), MCA, or an independent hearing examiner selected from the attorney general's office or from…”
Goldstein Albers v. Comm'n On, 2000 MT 8 (Mont. 2000).
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-611(3): 1 case
Steele v. McGregor, 1998 MT 85 (Mont. 1998). “See §§ 2-4-611, 2-4-614(1)(f), and 2-4-623, MCA; see also §§ 39-51-2402 and 39-51-2403, MCA.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-611(4): 7 cases
Wiser v. State, Dept. of Com., 2006 MT 20 (Mont. 2006). “Section 2-4-611(4), MCA, allows a party to challenge the bias or independence of an agency member, and in such cases, requires the agency to include its determination as part of the record.”
Goldstein v. Comm'n on Practice of the Supreme Court, 2000 MT 8 (Mont. 2000). “Thus, other professionals in Montana are afforded a hearing examiner or "judge" assigned on the basis of his or her "expertise required for the particular matter," under § 2-4-611(1), MCA, or an independent hearing examiner selected from the attorney general's office or from…”
Erickson v. State Ex Rel. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 938 P.2d 625 (Mont. 1997). “On remand, the District Court relied on § 2-4-611(4), MCA, regarding the disqualification of hearing examiners, and decided that a person could reasonably question the hearing examiner’s impartiality in this case.”
Bostwick Props., Inc. v. Montana Dep't of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 2013 MT 48 (Mont. 2013). “See § 2-4-611(4); § 85-2-310(1)(b), MCA; see also In re Best, 2010 MT 59, ¶ 22 , 355 Mont.”
Allied Waste Servs. of N. Am., LLC v. Mont. Dep't of Pub. Serv. Reg., 447 P.3d 463 (Mont. 2019). “¶21 PSC and Big Foot have argued at length that the writ of mandate was issued in error because the District Court reached the issue prematurely, prior to briefing on the merits of the request, and failed to follow the applicable administrative procedures provided by MAPA,…”
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.