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

Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-613 (2026)

Ex Parte Consultations

✓ 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. 2-4-613 Ex parte consultations

TITLE 2. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT

Part 6. Contested Cases

Ex Parte Consultations

2-4-613. Ex parte consultations. Unless required for disposition of ex parte matters authorized by law, the person or persons who are charged with the duty of rendering a decision or to make findings of fact and conclusions of law in a contested case, after issuance of notice of hearing, may not communicate with any party or a party's representative in connection with any issue of fact or law in the case except upon notice and opportunity for all parties to participate.

History: En. Sec. 14, Ch. 2, Ex. L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 82-4214; amd. Sec. 44, Ch. 61, L. 2007.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2021 · leading case: Miller v. Workforce Saf. & Ins., 2006 ND 1 (N.D. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Miller v. Workforce Saf. & Ins., 2006 ND 1 (N.D. 2006). · cites it 2× “See Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-613 (2005); N.M. Stat.”
Allied Waste Servs. of N. Am., LLC v. Mont. Dep't of Pub. Serv. Reg., 447 P.3d 463 (Mont. 2019). · cites it 5× “Here, ex parte communication between a PSC lawyer appointed as examiner for discovery disputes and counsel for Big Foot occurred in violation of § 2-4-613, MCA, and the PSC lawyer then propounded discovery *468 to the Petitioners.”
Miller v. Workforce Saf. & Ins., 2006 ND 1 (N.D. 2006). “See Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-613 (2005); N.M. Stat.”
Gruba v. PSC, 2021 MT 186N (Mont. 2021). · cites it 3× “Section 2-4-613, MCA. Section 2-4-612(5), MCA, provides, “[a] party shall have the right to conduct cross-examinations required for a full and true disclosure of fact, including the right to cross-examine the author of any document prepared by or on behalf of or for the use of…”
Sorlie v. Dept. of Com., 2000 MT 253N (Mont. 2000). · cites it 7× “Ex Parte Communications ¶35 Sorlie contends that the Board violated § 2-4-613, MCA, because the Board had ex parte communications with opposing counsel.”
Klock v. Dept. of Labor (Mont. 1995). · cites it 3× “Was the Department of Labor and Industry's letter to the District Court while the decision was pending an improper ex parte contact under § 2-4-613, MCA? 2. IS the hearing examiner's decision supported by substantial credible evidence? Marshall began working for IGA on September…”
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.