Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 25. CIVIL PROCEDURE · CHAPTER 2. VENUE · Part 1. Proper Place of Trial -- Venue
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122 (2026)

Torts

✓ 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 25
  3. CHAPTER 2
  4. Part 1
  5. 25-2-122 Torts

TITLE 25. CIVIL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 2. VENUE

Part 1. Proper Place of Trial -- Venue

Torts

25-2-122. Torts. (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) through (4), the proper place of trial for a tort action is:

(a) the county in which the defendants or any of them reside at the commencement of the action; or

(b) the county in which the tort was committed. If the tort is interrelated with and dependent upon a claim for breach of contract, the tort was committed, for the purpose of determining the proper place of trial, in the county in which the contract was to be performed.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (4), if the defendant is a corporation incorporated in a state other than Montana, the proper place of trial for a tort action is:

(a) the county in which the tort was committed;

(b) the county in which the plaintiff resides; or

(c) the county in which the corporation's resident agent is located, as required by law.

(3) Except as provided in subsection (4), if the defendant is a resident of a state other than Montana, the proper place of trial for a tort action is:

(a) the county in which the tort was committed; or

(b) the county in which the plaintiff resides.

(4) If the defendant is a railroad, as defined in 69-14-102, and the plaintiff is a Montana resident, the proper place of trial of a claim subject to the federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. 51, et seq., is any county in which the railroad does business.

History: En. Sec. 20, p. 46, Bannack Stat.; amd. Sec. 20, p. 138, L. 1867; en. Sec. 25, p. 31, Cod. Stat. 1871; re-en. Sec. 59, p. 52, L. 1877; re-en. Sec. 59, 1st Div. Rev. Stat. 1879; re-en. Sec. 59, 1st Div. Comp. Stat. 1887; re-en. Sec. 613, C. Civ. Proc. 1895; re-en. Sec. 6504, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 9096, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. C. Civ. Proc. Sec. 395; re-en. Sec. 9096, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 93-2904(part); amd. Sec. 10, Ch. 432, L. 1985; sec. 25-2-102, MCA 1983; redes. 25-2-122 by Code Commissioner, 1985; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 332, L. 1995; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 352, L. 1997; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 217, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 104, L. 2015.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: Davis v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 937 P.2d 27 (Mont. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Davis v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 937 P.2d 27 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 80× “Burlington Northern filed motions to change venue based on the 1995 amendment to § 25-2-122, MCA, in both cases. In Nelson's case, the railroad argued that the 1995 amendment was retroactive and that it applied to Nelson's case, even though that case had been filed prior to the…”
Circle S Seeds of Montana, Inc. v. Montana Merchandising, Inc., 2006 MT 311 (Mont. 2006). · cites it 45× “¶17 MMI argues that Cascade County represents the proper venue for Circle S's claim on grounds that § 25-2-122, MCA, controls venue determination.”
Rule v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 2005 MT 6 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 60× “In this regard, he relies on Senator Bruce Crippen’s comments during legislative hearings on the *332 1995 and the 1997 amendments to § 25-2-122, MCA. Specifically, he cites Crippen’s remarks in response to criticism of the bill by railroad worker and union opponents.”
Deichl v. Savage, 2009 MT 293 (Mont. 2009). · cites it 27× “Section 25-2-122, MCA governs venue for tort *751 actions and provides that the proper place of trial for a tort claim is "(a) the county in which the defendants or any of them reside at the commencement of the action; or (b) the county in which the tort was committed.”
Wentz v. Montana Power Co., 928 P.2d 237 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 20× “Section 25-2-122, MCA, provides in pertinent part: Torts.”
Nelson v. Cenex, Inc., 2004 MT 170 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 15× “The specific venue rules for tort actions are set forth in § 25-2-122, MCA, which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3), the proper place of trial for a tort action is: (a) the county in which the defendants or any of them…”
Allen v. Atl. Richfield Co., 2005 MT 281 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 8× “For tort actions, § 25-2-122(1), MCA, provides that, among other proper venues, the proper place for a tort action is (a) the county in which the defendants or any of them reside at the commencement of the action; or (b) the county in which the tort was committed.”
Spoonheim v. Norwest Bank Montana, N.A., 922 P.2d 528 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 24× “Section 25-2-122(2), MCA (1995), provides: (2) If the defendant is a corporation incorporated in a state other than Montana, the proper place of trial for a tort action is: (a) the comity in which the tort was committed; (b) the county in which the plaintiff resides; or (c) the…”
Haug v. Burlington N. R.R., 770 P.2d 517 (Mont. 1989). · cites it 7× “Section 25-2-122, MCA, provides that the proper place of trial for a tort action is the county where the tort was committed.”
Lockhead v. Weinstein, 2001 MT 132 (Mont. 2001). · cites it 6× “Section 25-2-122(3), MCA. Therefore, venue would be proper in both Missoula County and the county in which Lockhead resides.”
Gabriel v. Sch. Dist. No. 4, Libby, 870 P.2d 1351 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 4× “*1354 When considering the first cause of action, the proper place of trial for the tort action is fixed by § 25-2-122, MCA, which provides in pertinent part: 25-2-122.”
Meyer v. Montana Power Co., 2005 MT 66 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 14× “2d 1315, 1317 , but argues that because § 25-2-126(2), 2 MCA (venue for actions against political subdivisions), is more specific than § 25-2-122, MCA (venue for tort *287 actions), it is entitled to application of the political subdivision provisions of § 25-2-126(2), MCA,…”
Show all 41 citing cases →
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(1) — 16 cases
Circle S Seeds of Montana, Inc. v. Montana Merchandising, Inc., 2006 MT 311 (Mont. 2006). “¶17 MMI argues that Cascade County represents the proper venue for Circle S's claim on grounds that § 25-2-122, MCA, controls venue determination.”
Allen v. Atl. Richfield Co., 2005 MT 281 (Mont. 2005). “For tort actions, § 25-2-122(1), MCA, provides that, among other proper venues, the proper place for a tort action is (a) the county in which the defendants or any of them reside at the commencement of the action; or (b) the county in which the tort was committed.”
Deichl v. Savage, 2009 MT 293 (Mont. 2009). “Section 25-2-122, MCA governs venue for tort *751 actions and provides that the proper place of trial for a tort claim is "(a) the county in which the defendants or any of them reside at the commencement of the action; or (b) the county in which the tort was committed.”
Rule v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 2005 MT 6 (Mont. 2005). “In this regard, he relies on Senator Bruce Crippen’s comments during legislative hearings on the *332 1995 and the 1997 amendments to § 25-2-122, MCA. Specifically, he cites Crippen’s remarks in response to criticism of the bill by railroad worker and union opponents.”
Davis v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 937 P.2d 27 (Mont. 1997). “Burlington Northern filed motions to change venue based on the 1995 amendment to § 25-2-122, MCA, in both cases. In Nelson's case, the railroad argued that the 1995 amendment was retroactive and that it applied to Nelson's case, even though that case had been filed prior to the…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(1)(a) — 3 cases
Circle S Seeds of Montana, Inc. v. Montana Merchandising, Inc., 2006 MT 311 (Mont. 2006). “¶17 MMI argues that Cascade County represents the proper venue for Circle S's claim on grounds that § 25-2-122, MCA, controls venue determination.”
Meyer v. Montana Power Co., 2005 MT 66 (Mont. 2005). “2d 1315, 1317 , but argues that because § 25-2-126(2), 2 MCA (venue for actions against political subdivisions), is more specific than § 25-2-122, MCA (venue for tort *287 actions), it is entitled to application of the political subdivision provisions of § 25-2-126(2), MCA,…”
Davenport v. Morrison, 2016 MT 333N (Mont. 2016).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(1)(b) — 5 cases
Circle S Seeds of Montana, Inc. v. Montana Merchandising, Inc., 2006 MT 311 (Mont. 2006). “¶17 MMI argues that Cascade County represents the proper venue for Circle S's claim on grounds that § 25-2-122, MCA, controls venue determination.”
Deichl v. Savage, 2009 MT 293 (Mont. 2009). “Section 25-2-122, MCA governs venue for tort *751 actions and provides that the proper place of trial for a tort claim is "(a) the county in which the defendants or any of them reside at the commencement of the action; or (b) the county in which the tort was committed.”
Wentz v. Montana Power Co., 928 P.2d 237 (Mont. 1996). “Section 25-2-122, MCA, provides in pertinent part: Torts.”
DML, INC. v. Fulbright, 2005 MT 204 (Mont. 2005).
Davenport v. Morrison, 2016 MT 333N (Mont. 2016).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(2) — 10 cases
Davis v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 937 P.2d 27 (Mont. 1997). “Burlington Northern filed motions to change venue based on the 1995 amendment to § 25-2-122, MCA, in both cases. In Nelson's case, the railroad argued that the 1995 amendment was retroactive and that it applied to Nelson's case, even though that case had been filed prior to the…”
Rule v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 2005 MT 6 (Mont. 2005). “In this regard, he relies on Senator Bruce Crippen’s comments during legislative hearings on the *332 1995 and the 1997 amendments to § 25-2-122, MCA. Specifically, he cites Crippen’s remarks in response to criticism of the bill by railroad worker and union opponents.”
Spoonheim v. Norwest Bank Montana, N.A., 922 P.2d 528 (Mont. 1996). “Section 25-2-122(2), MCA (1995), provides: (2) If the defendant is a corporation incorporated in a state other than Montana, the proper place of trial for a tort action is: (a) the comity in which the tort was committed; (b) the county in which the plaintiff resides; or (c) the…”
Nelson v. Cenex, Inc., 2004 MT 170 (Mont. 2004). “The specific venue rules for tort actions are set forth in § 25-2-122, MCA, which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3), the proper place of trial for a tort action is: (a) the county in which the defendants or any of them…”
Berlin v. Boedecker, 767 P.2d 349 (Mont. 1989).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(2)(a) — 1 case
Lucero v. Ford Motor Co., 444 P.3d 389 (Mont. 2019).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(2)(b) — 2 cases
Lucero v. Ford Motor Co., 444 P.3d 389 (Mont. 2019).
Ward v. Johnson, 2012 MT 96 (Mont. 2012).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(2)(c) — 2 cases
Nelson v. Cenex, Inc., 2004 MT 170 (Mont. 2004). “The specific venue rules for tort actions are set forth in § 25-2-122, MCA, which provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3), the proper place of trial for a tort action is: (a) the county in which the defendants or any of them…”
Guang Xiang Liang v. Lai, 2004 MT 188 (Mont. 2004).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(3) — 2 cases
Lockhead v. Weinstein, 2001 MT 132 (Mont. 2001). “Section 25-2-122(3), MCA. Therefore, venue would be proper in both Missoula County and the county in which Lockhead resides.”
Rule v. Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co., 2005 MT 6 (Mont. 2005). “In this regard, he relies on Senator Bruce Crippen’s comments during legislative hearings on the *332 1995 and the 1997 amendments to § 25-2-122, MCA. Specifically, he cites Crippen’s remarks in response to criticism of the bill by railroad worker and union opponents.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(l)(a) — 1 case
Meyer v. Montana Power Co., 2005 MT 66 (Mont. 2005). “2d 1315, 1317 , but argues that because § 25-2-126(2), 2 MCA (venue for actions against political subdivisions), is more specific than § 25-2-122, MCA (venue for tort *287 actions), it is entitled to application of the political subdivision provisions of § 25-2-126(2), MCA,…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 25-2-122(l)(b) — 5 cases
Wentz v. Montana Power Co., 928 P.2d 237 (Mont. 1996). “Section 25-2-122, MCA, provides in pertinent part: Torts.”
Deichl v. Savage, 2009 MT 293 (Mont. 2009). “Section 25-2-122, MCA governs venue for tort *751 actions and provides that the proper place of trial for a tort claim is "(a) the county in which the defendants or any of them reside at the commencement of the action; or (b) the county in which the tort was committed.”
DML, INC. v. Fulbright, 2005 MT 204 (Mont. 2005).
Spoonheim v. Norwest Bank Montana, N.A., 922 P.2d 528 (Mont. 1996). “Section 25-2-122(2), MCA (1995), provides: (2) If the defendant is a corporation incorporated in a state other than Montana, the proper place of trial for a tort action is: (a) the comity in which the tort was committed; (b) the county in which the plaintiff resides; or (c) the…”
Guang Xiang Liang v. Lai, 2004 MT 188 (Mont. 2004).
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.