25-2-117. Multiple defendants. If there are two or more defendants in an action, a county that is a proper place of trial for any defendant is proper for all defendants, subject to the power of the court to order separate trials under Rule 42(b) of the Montana Rules of Civil Procedure. If an action with two or more defendants is brought in a county that is not a proper place of trial for any of the defendants, any defendant may make a motion for change of place of trial to any county which is a proper place of trial.
Montana Code Annotated
Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-117 (2026)
Multiple Defendants
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MT-LEGleg.mt.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
TITLE 25. CIVIL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 2. VENUE
Part 1. Proper Place of Trial -- Venue
Multiple Defendants
History: En. Sec. 7, Ch. 432, L. 1985.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases, 1986–2019 · leading case: Allen v. Atl. Richfield Co., 2005 MT 281 (Mont. 2005).
Allen v. Atl. Richfield Co., 2005 MT 281 (Mont. 2005). “Section 25-2-117, MCA. ¶ 9 Montana law provides additional venue statutes that allow for exceptions to the general venue rules of § 25-2-118, MCA, for certain types of actions.”
Weiss by & Through Weiss v. State, 712 P.2d 1315 (Mont. 1986). “Plaintiffs assert that Section 25-2-117, MCA, is controlling, and that where venue is proper as to the State, venue is also proper for Glacier County and its commissioners.”
Meyer v. Montana Power Co., 2005 MT 66 (Mont. 2005). “¶13 Meyer asserts that Silver Bow County is also a proper venue for her claim against the City pursuant to § 25-2-117, MCA, which provides that “[i]f there are two or more defendants in an action, a county that is a proper place of trial for any defendant is proper for all…”
Emery v. Federated Foods, Inc., 863 P.2d 426 (Mont. 1993). “See §§ 25-2-117 and -118, MCA. We conclude, therefore, that the District Court erred in changing venue to Flathead County.”
State Ex Rel. Dep't of Health & Env't Sciences v. Pegasus Gold Corp., 889 P.2d 1197 (Mont. 1995). “Section 25-2-117, MCA, provides that “[i]f there are two or more defendants in an action, a county that is a proper place of trial for any defendant is proper for all defendants.”
Platt v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 721 P.2d 336 (Mont. 1986). “The plaintiffs base their position that Silver Bow County is a proper place of trial on Section 25-2-117, MCA: “Multiple defendants.”
State Bank of Townsend v. Worline, 738 P.2d 1295 (Mont. 1987). “The reasoning given by the court was that since, as to defendants Marshall, Worline and Sayer, the action was properly filed in Broadwater County, then pursuant to Section 25-2-117, MCA, all defendants can be tried in Broadwater County.”
Farmers Union Ass'n v. Paquin, 2009 MT 305 (Mont. 2009). “Section 25-2-117, MCA. ¶9 In granting Nedens’ motion for change of venue, the District Court orally stated its decision was based on §25-2-116, MCA, and the county in which Nedens was to perform his employment contract.”
Lucero v. Ford Motor Co., 444 P.3d 389 (Mont. 2019). “" Section 25-2-117, MCA ; Farmers Union Ass'n , ¶ 8 .”
Ward v. Johnson, 2012 MT 96 (Mont. 2012). “” Section 25-2-117, MCA. This statute “is intended to apply to all venue provisions.”
Kendall v. State, 752 P.2d 1091 (Mont. 1988). “Under Section 25-2-117, MCA, a county which is a proper place of trial for any one of the defendants is proper for all defendants, subject to the court’s power to order separate trials.”
In Re Lake Cnty.'s Obligation for Operating Costs of Fourth Jud. Dist., 724 P.2d 183 (Mont. 1986). “If they can then Section 25-2-117, MCA, (1985) provides for the joinder of Lake County in such an action.”
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.