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

Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623 (2026)

Final Orders -- Notification -- Availability

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 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. 2-4-623 Final orders -- notification -- availability

TITLE 2. GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 4. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT

Part 6. Contested Cases

Final Orders -- Notification -- Availability

2-4-623. Final orders -- notification -- availability. (1) (a) A final decision or order adverse to a party in a contested case must be in writing. A final decision must include findings of fact and conclusions of law, separately stated. Findings of fact, if set forth in statutory language, must be accompanied by a concise and explicit statement of the underlying facts supporting the findings. Except as provided in 75-2-213 and 75-20-223, a final decision must be issued within 90 days after a contested case is considered to be submitted for a final decision unless, for good cause shown, the period is extended for an additional time not to exceed 30 days.

(b) If an agency intends to issue a final written decision in a contested case that grants or denies relief and the relief that is granted or denied differs materially from a final agency decision that was orally announced on the record, the agency may not issue the final written decision without first providing notice to the parties and an opportunity to be heard before the agency.

(2) Findings of fact must be based exclusively on the evidence and on matters officially noticed.

(3) Each conclusion of law must be supported by authority or by a reasoned opinion.

(4) If, in accordance with agency rules, a party submitted proposed findings of fact, the decision must include a ruling upon each proposed finding.

(5) Parties must be notified by mail of any decision or order. Upon request, a copy of the decision or order must be delivered or mailed in a timely manner to each party and to each party's attorney of record.

(6) Each agency shall index and make available for public inspection all final decisions and orders, including declaratory rulings under 2-4-501. An agency decision or order is not valid or effective against any person or party, and it may not be invoked by the agency for any purpose until it has been made available for public inspection as required in this section. This provision is not applicable in favor of any person or party who has actual knowledge of the decision or order or when a state statute or federal statute or regulation prohibits public disclosure of the contents of a decision or order.

History: (1), (3) thru (6)En. Sec. 13, Ch. 2, Ex. L. 1971; amd. Sec. 15, Ch. 285, L. 1977; Sec. 82-4213, R.C.M. 1947; (2)En. Sec. 9, Ch. 2, Ex. L. 1971; Sec. 82-4209, R.C.M. 1947; R.C.M. 1947, 82-4209(7), 82-4213; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 347, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 571, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 445, L. 2009.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: N. Plains Resource Council v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 594 P.2d 297 (Mont. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
N. Plains Resource Council v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 594 P.2d 297 (Mont. 1979). · cites it 24× “1947, now section 2-4-623 MCA. We agree. In connection with the Rosebud versus McKay coal point in this issue, the District Court held that the Board of Natural *311 Resources did not make adequate findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding whether the use of only Rosebud…”
State ex rel. Montana Wilderness Ass'n v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 648 P.2d 734 (Mont. 1982). · cites it 26× “While each finding is not immediately followed by the supporting underlying facts, when the findings and decision are viewed as a whole, it will be seen that the findings are adequately factually supported.”
Baldridge v. Bd. of Trs., 870 P.2d 711 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 28× “The State Superintendent must then remand the case to the County Superintendent with directions that she must carefully consider this case and draft findings of fact, conclusions of law and an order as mandated in § 2-4-623, MCA, and Rule 10.6.119, ARM. We now discuss the…”
Yanzick v. Sch. Dist. No. 23, 641 P.2d 431 (Mont. 1982). · cites it 12× “" MAPA also sets forth the form of findings of fact and conclusions of law, stating in section 2-4-623, MCA, as follows: "(1) A final decision or order adverse to a party in a contested case shall be in writing or stated in the record.”
Micone v. Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2011 MT 178, 258 P.3d 403. · cites it 64× “" ¶ 13 The parties do not dispute the timeline of events. The Hearing Officer held a contested hearing on March 12, 2008.”
In re the Transfer of Location for Montana All-Alcoholic Beverages Resort License No. 07-999-2667-009, 2008 MT 165, 184 P.3d 324. · cites it 10× “the protest hearing was not the correct forum in which to determine whether the Mountain Monkey was within the boundaries of the BMSR area; (4) Heffelfinger violated § 2-4-623(4), MCA, insofar as he failed to provide a ruling on each of Hall’s proposed finding of fact; (5) the…”
Dumont v. Wickens Bros. Constr. Co., 598 P.2d 1099 (Mont. 1979). · cites it 6× “Thus, section 2-4-623 MCA of the Administrative Procedure Act applies.”
Johansen v. State, Dept. of Nat. Resources, 1998 MT 51, 955 P.2d 653. · cites it 4× “It also denied his request for reinstatement of the lease, and stated that the letter constituted a final agency decision pursuant to MAPA, § 2-4-623, MCA, which pertains to final agency decisions adverse to a party in a contested case.”
MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Montana Dep't of Pub. Serv. Reg., 858 P.2d 364 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 9× “In a workers’ compensation case which challenged the timeliness of an appeal to the district court, this Court noted that proceedings in the Workers’ Compensation Court are governed by MAPA and, therefore, § 2-4-623, MCA, applies to require service by mail or personally.”
Baldridge v. Bd. of Trs., 951 P.2d 1343 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 8× “Pursuant to § 2-4-623, MCA, a county superintendent's decision regarding the dismissal of a teacher by school trustees requires written findings of fact and conclusions of law, separately stated, with support provided for each conclusion of law.”
Knowles v. State ex rel. Lindeen, 2009 MT 415, 222 P.3d 595. · cites it 12× “See § 2-4-623, MCA. Nevertheless, the District Court purported at the end of its Question (1) analysis to reverse the Commissioner's Conclusion of Law No.”
Martinez v. Yellowstone Cnty. Welfare Dep't, 626 P.2d 242 (Mont. 1981). · cites it 3× “Furthermore, section 2-4-623, MCA, governing the final order handed down by the Commission in contested cases, provides that: *53 “(1) .”
Show all 40 citing cases →
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623(1): 8 cases
State ex rel. Montana Wilderness Ass'n v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 648 P.2d 734 (Mont. 1982). “While each finding is not immediately followed by the supporting underlying facts, when the findings and decision are viewed as a whole, it will be seen that the findings are adequately factually supported.”
Baldridge v. Bd. of Trs., 870 P.2d 711 (Mont. 1994). “The State Superintendent must then remand the case to the County Superintendent with directions that she must carefully consider this case and draft findings of fact, conclusions of law and an order as mandated in § 2-4-623, MCA, and Rule 10.6.119, ARM. We now discuss the…”
Donnes v. State ex rel. Superintendent of Pub. Instruction, 672 P.2d 617 (Mont. 1983).
Lowry v. State, 2026 MT 71N.
Donnes v. Superintendent of Pub., No. 83-075 (Mont. Nov. 23, 1983).
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623(1)(a): 5 cases
Knowles v. State ex rel. Lindeen, 2009 MT 415, 222 P.3d 595. “See § 2-4-623, MCA. Nevertheless, the District Court purported at the end of its Question (1) analysis to reverse the Commissioner's Conclusion of Law No.”
Micone v. Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2011 MT 178, 258 P.3d 403. “" ¶ 13 The parties do not dispute the timeline of events. The Hearing Officer held a contested hearing on March 12, 2008.”
North Star v. PSC, 2022 MT 103.
Zabrocki v. Teachers' Ret. Sys., 2016 MT 146, 372 P.3d 1278.
The Stube Chuckwagon Grill, 2008 MT 165.
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623(3): 2 cases
State ex rel. Montana Wilderness Ass'n v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 648 P.2d 734 (Mont. 1982). “While each finding is not immediately followed by the supporting underlying facts, when the findings and decision are viewed as a whole, it will be seen that the findings are adequately factually supported.”
State ex rel. Dept. of Pub. Serv. Reg. v. Montana Irrigators, Inc., 680 P.2d 963 (Mont. 1984).
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623(4): 7 cases
State ex rel. Montana Wilderness Ass'n v. Bd. of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 648 P.2d 734 (Mont. 1982). “While each finding is not immediately followed by the supporting underlying facts, when the findings and decision are viewed as a whole, it will be seen that the findings are adequately factually supported.”
In re the Transfer of Location for Montana All-Alcoholic Beverages Resort License No. 07-999-2667-009, 2008 MT 165, 184 P.3d 324. “the protest hearing was not the correct forum in which to determine whether the Mountain Monkey was within the boundaries of the BMSR area; (4) Heffelfinger violated § 2-4-623(4), MCA, insofar as he failed to provide a ruling on each of Hall’s proposed finding of fact; (5) the…”
Brackman v. Bd. of Nursing, 851 P.2d 1055 (Mont. 1993).
Donnes v. State ex rel. Superintendent of Pub. Instruction, 672 P.2d 617 (Mont. 1983).
Classification Appeal of Mead v. Bd. of Pers. Appeals, 766 P.2d 1300 (Mont. 1988).
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623(5): 2 cases
Weber v. Pub. Employees' Ret. Bd., 890 P.2d 1296 (Mont. 1995).
Garmann v. E.R. Fegert Co., 764 P.2d 471 (Mont. 1988).
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623(a): 1 case
Micone v. Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2011 MT 178, 258 P.3d 403. “" ¶ 13 The parties do not dispute the timeline of events. The Hearing Officer held a contested hearing on March 12, 2008.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 2-4-623(l)(a): 5 cases
In re the Transfer of Location for Montana All-Alcoholic Beverages Resort License No. 07-999-2667-009, 2008 MT 165, 184 P.3d 324. “the protest hearing was not the correct forum in which to determine whether the Mountain Monkey was within the boundaries of the BMSR area; (4) Heffelfinger violated § 2-4-623(4), MCA, insofar as he failed to provide a ruling on each of Hall’s proposed finding of fact; (5) the…”
Knowles v. State ex rel. Lindeen, 2009 MT 415, 222 P.3d 595. “See § 2-4-623, MCA. Nevertheless, the District Court purported at the end of its Question (1) analysis to reverse the Commissioner's Conclusion of Law No.”
Micone v. Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2011 MT 178, 258 P.3d 403. “" ¶ 13 The parties do not dispute the timeline of events. The Hearing Officer held a contested hearing on March 12, 2008.”
Blacktail Mountain Ranch, Co. v. State, 2009 MT 345, 220 P.3d 388.
Zabrocki v. Teachers' Ret. Sys., 2016 MT 146, 372 P.3d 1278.
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.