Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 20. EDUCATION · CHAPTER 3. ELECTED OFFICIALS · Part 1. Superintendent of Public Instruction
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 20-3-107 (2026)

Controversy Appeal

✓ 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 20
  3. CHAPTER 3
  4. Part 1
  5. 20-3-107 Controversy appeal

TITLE 20. EDUCATION

CHAPTER 3. ELECTED OFFICIALS

Part 1. Superintendent of Public Instruction

Controversy Appeal

20-3-107. Controversy appeal. (1) The superintendent of public instruction shall decide matters of controversy when they are appealed from:

(a) a decision of a county superintendent rendered under the provisions of 20-3-210, except for a decision of a county superintendent or an arbitrator in a teacher termination case; or

(b) a decision of a county transportation committee rendered under the provisions of 20-10-132.

(2) The superintendent of public instruction shall make a decision on the basis of the transcript of the fact-finding hearing conducted by the county superintendent or county transportation committee and documents presented at the hearing. The superintendent of public instruction may require, if considered necessary, affidavits, verified statements, or sworn testimony as to the facts in issue. The decision of the superintendent of public instruction is final, subject to the proper legal remedies in the state courts. The proceedings must be commenced no later than 60 days after the date of the decision of the superintendent of public instruction.

(3) In order to establish a uniform method of hearing and determining matters of controversy arising under this title, the superintendent of public instruction shall prescribe and enforce rules of practice and regulations for the conduct of hearings and the determination of appeals by all school officials of the state.

(4) Whenever in a contested case the superintendent of public instruction is disqualified from rendering a final decision, the superintendent of public instruction shall appoint a hearings examiner as provided in 2-4-611 and the decision of the hearings examiner constitutes the superintendent's final order except as provided in this subsection. The final order is subject to all the provisions of Title 2, chapter 4, relating to final agency decisions or orders, including judicial review under Title 2, chapter 4, part 7.

History: En. 75-5709 by Sec. 18, Ch. 5, L. 1971; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 300, L. 1974; R.C.M. 1947, 75-5709; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 467, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 438, L. 1997.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1982–2000 · leading case: Trs., Carbon Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 28 v. Spivey, 805 P.2d 61 (Mont. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Trs., Carbon Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 28 v. Spivey, 805 P.2d 61 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 38× “” The School District counters that the proper statute of limitations is § 20-3-107, MCA, which gives a party sixty (60) days to appeal a decision of the Superintendent of Public Instruction.”
Yanzick v. Sch. Dist. No. 23, Etc., 641 P.2d 431 (Mont. 1982). · cites it 6× “So far as the State Superintendent is concerned, section 20-3-107, MCA, sets forth these essential elements for the appeal of the controversy to the State Superintendent: "(1) The superintendent of public instruction shall decide matters of controversy when they are appealed…”
Irving v. Sch. Dist. No. 1-1A, 813 P.2d 417 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 4× “A review of the record, however, reveals that Steffani did file her appeal within the sixty day period provided by § 20-3-107(2), MCA. However, the Superintendent denied jurisdiction of Steffani's appeal because she found that as a non-tenured teacher, Steffani was not entitled…”
Med. Horse v. Trs., Big Horn Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 27, 823 P.2d 230 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 4× “Following the directives of § 20-3-107, MCA, Medicine Horse next appealed to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction; she upheld his discharge and status as an "at will" employee.”
Harris v. Bauer, 672 P.2d 26 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 3× “Section 20-3-107, MCA, sets forth the essential elements for appeal of the County Superintendent’s determination to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction.”
Petition to Transfer Territory, 2000 MT 342. · cites it 2× “See § 20-3-107(2), MCA (1993). In its appeals to the state superintendent, LDHSD raised at least one constitutional issue and the state superintendent properly left that issue for resolution by the courts.”
Pretty on Top v. Snively, 879 P.2d 49 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 18× “Therefore, we conclude that § 20-3-107, MCA (1989), is not applicable here.”
Hayes v. Lame Deer High Sch. Dist., 2000 MT 342, 15 P.3d 447. · cites it 2× “See § 20-3-107(2), MCA (1993). In its appeals to the state superintendent, LDHSD raised at least one constitutional issue and the state superintendent properly left that issue for resolution by the courts.”
Pryor Sch. Dist. Nos. 2 & 3 v. Superintendent of Pub. Instruction, 707 P.2d 1094 (Mont. 1985). · cites it 3× “See Section 20-3-107, MCA. The State Superintendent, after reviewing the extensive and exhaustive hearing transcript and the documents and exhibits which were introduced at the hearing, finds that it is not necessary to supplement the hearing or the record with additional…”
Trs. of Lincoln Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 13 v. Holden, 754 P.2d 506 (Mont. 1988). · cites it 2× “Sections 20-3-107(2), MCA, and 20-3-210(3), MCA.”
Frazer Sch. Dist. No. 2 v. Forsness, 734 P.2d 1218 (Mont. 1987). · cites it 6× “Both of these decisions severely limit the statutory discretionary power lodged in the Superintendent of Public Instruction on matters of controversy appealed to the Superintendent under Section 20-3-107, MCA. -. i s . , 1 4 . -'.”
Petition to Transfer Territory, 2000 MT 342. · cites it 2× “See § 20-3-107(2), MCA (1993). In its appeals to the state superintendent, LDHSD raised at least one constitutional issue and the state superintendent properly left that issue for resolution by the courts.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 20-3-107(2): 7 cases
Trs., Carbon Cnty. Sch. Dist. No. 28 v. Spivey, 805 P.2d 61 (Mont. 1991). “” The School District counters that the proper statute of limitations is § 20-3-107, MCA, which gives a party sixty (60) days to appeal a decision of the Superintendent of Public Instruction.”
Irving v. Sch. Dist. No. 1-1A, 813 P.2d 417 (Mont. 1991). “A review of the record, however, reveals that Steffani did file her appeal within the sixty day period provided by § 20-3-107(2), MCA. However, the Superintendent denied jurisdiction of Steffani's appeal because she found that as a non-tenured teacher, Steffani was not entitled…”
Petition to Transfer Territory, 2000 MT 342. “See § 20-3-107(2), MCA (1993). In its appeals to the state superintendent, LDHSD raised at least one constitutional issue and the state superintendent properly left that issue for resolution by the courts.”
Pretty on Top v. Snively, 879 P.2d 49 (Mont. 1994). “Therefore, we conclude that § 20-3-107, MCA (1989), is not applicable here.”
Hayes v. Lame Deer High Sch. Dist., 2000 MT 342, 15 P.3d 447. “See § 20-3-107(2), MCA (1993). In its appeals to the state superintendent, LDHSD raised at least one constitutional issue and the state superintendent properly left that issue for resolution by the courts.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 20-3-107(l)(a): 1 case
Pretty on Top v. Snively, 879 P.2d 49 (Mont. 1994). “Therefore, we conclude that § 20-3-107, MCA (1989), is not applicable here.”
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.