Notes of Decisions
Cited in
66
cases (
10 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case:
Seltzer v. Morton, 2007 MT 62 (Mont. 2007).
Seltzer v. Morton, 2007 MT 62 (Mont. 2007).
· cites it 22× “In applying federal due process jurisprudence, the court concluded that the punitive verdicts against Morton and Gladwell were not constitutionally excessive, but also concluded that the verdict against GDC did not comport with due process and therefore had to be reduced to $9.”
Folsom v. Montana Pub. Employees' Ass'n, 400 P.3d 706 (Mont. 2017).
· cites it 27× “2d 600, 605 (1980) (pre-1987 amendment of §§ 27-1-220 and -221, MCA—punitive damages unavailable absent actual damages); Paulson v.”
Sunburst Sch. Dist. No. 2 v. Texaco, Inc., 2007 MT 183 (Mont. 2007).
· cites it 20× “¶ 219 Texaco contends the District Court erred in failing to apply a 2003 statutory cap on punitive damages to reduce the $25 million award in this case because, while Sunburst filed suit in 2001, the jury rendered its verdict in 2004.”
Blue Ridge Homes, Inc. v. Thein, 2008 MT 264 (Mont. 2008).
· cites it 20× “Section 27-1-220(3), MCA, provides that “[a]n award for punitive damages may not exceed $10 million or 3% of a defendant’s net worth, whichever is less.”
Est. of Gleason v. Cent. United Life Ins., 2015 MT 140 (Mont. 2015).
· cites it 17× “¶46 Section 27-1-220(2)(a), MCA, prohibits punitive damages in contract cases, “[u]nless otherwise expressly provided by statute.”
Beaver v. Montana Dep't of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 2003 MT 287 (Mont. 2003).
· cites it 14× “ISSUE 5 ¶ 77 Did the District Court err when it determined that Beaver was not entitled to punitive damages from Ness? ¶ 78 As the trier of fact, the District Court found that Ness was not guilty of actual fraud or actual malice and was thus not liable for punitive damages…”
Murphy Homes, Inc. v. Muller, 2007 MT 140 (Mont. 2007).
· cites it 8× “” ¶85 The Montana Legislature amended § 27-1-220, MCA, in 2003 to include the 3% limitation on punitive damages.”
Tillett v. Lippert, 909 P.2d 1158 (Mont. 1996).
· cites it 13× “Lippert’s conduct, under the plain language of § 27-1-220, MCA, and the rationale of a majority of jurisdictions which have examined this issue, punitive damages are not awardable against a tortfeasor’s estate.”
Jacobsen v. Allstate Ins., 2013 MT 244 (Mont. 2013).
· cites it 8× “a] mandatory injunction requiring Allstate to: 9 (1) give all class members court-appointed notice of the right and opportunity to obtain re-opening and re-adjustment of their individual claims by timely returning a proof of claim form; and (2) re-open and re-adjust each…”
Finstad v. W.R. Grace & Co., 2000 MT 228 (Mont. 2000).
· cites it 8× “2d 1158 , we held that under Montana statute, § 27-1-220, MCA, punitive damages serve two purposes: (1) to set an example, and (2) to punish the wrongdoer.”
Winslow v. Montana Rail Link, Inc., 2005 MT 217 (Mont. 2005).
· cites it 6× “21 ¶55 Section 27-1-220(1), MCA, provides, in pertinent part, that “a judge or jury may award, in addition to compensatory damages, punitive damages for the sake of example and for the purpose of punishing a defendant.”
Emmerson v. Walker, 2010 MT 167 (Mont. 2010).
· cites it 6× “¶ 38 Section 27-1-220(1), MCA, provides that "a judge or jury may award, in addition to compensatory damages, punitive damages for the sake of example and for the purpose of punishing a defendant.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-220(1) — 13 cases
Folsom v. Montana Pub. Employees' Ass'n, 400 P.3d 706 (Mont. 2017).
“2d 600, 605 (1980) (pre-1987 amendment of §§ 27-1-220 and -221, MCA—punitive damages unavailable absent actual damages); Paulson v.”
Winslow v. Montana Rail Link, Inc., 2005 MT 217 (Mont. 2005).
“21 ¶55 Section 27-1-220(1), MCA, provides, in pertinent part, that “a judge or jury may award, in addition to compensatory damages, punitive damages for the sake of example and for the purpose of punishing a defendant.”
Emmerson v. Walker, 2010 MT 167 (Mont. 2010).
“¶ 38 Section 27-1-220(1), MCA, provides that "a judge or jury may award, in addition to compensatory damages, punitive damages for the sake of example and for the purpose of punishing a defendant.”
Beaver v. Montana Dep't of Nat. Resources & Conservation, 2003 MT 287 (Mont. 2003).
“ISSUE 5 ¶ 77 Did the District Court err when it determined that Beaver was not entitled to punitive damages from Ness? ¶ 78 As the trier of fact, the District Court found that Ness was not guilty of actual fraud or actual malice and was thus not liable for punitive damages…”
Finstad v. W.R. Grace & Co., 2000 MT 228 (Mont. 2000).
“2d 1158 , we held that under Montana statute, § 27-1-220, MCA, punitive damages serve two purposes: (1) to set an example, and (2) to punish the wrongdoer.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-220(2) — 2 cases
— Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-220(2)(a) — 4 cases
— Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-220(2)(a)(i) — 1 case
— Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-220(2)(b) — 1 case
— Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-220(2)(ii) — 1 case
— Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-220(3) — 11 cases
Seltzer v. Morton, 2007 MT 62 (Mont. 2007).
“In applying federal due process jurisprudence, the court concluded that the punitive verdicts against Morton and Gladwell were not constitutionally excessive, but also concluded that the verdict against GDC did not comport with due process and therefore had to be reduced to $9.”
Sunburst Sch. Dist. No. 2 v. Texaco, Inc., 2007 MT 183 (Mont. 2007).
“¶ 219 Texaco contends the District Court erred in failing to apply a 2003 statutory cap on punitive damages to reduce the $25 million award in this case because, while Sunburst filed suit in 2001, the jury rendered its verdict in 2004.”
Blue Ridge Homes, Inc. v. Thein, 2008 MT 264 (Mont. 2008).
“Section 27-1-220(3), MCA, provides that “[a]n award for punitive damages may not exceed $10 million or 3% of a defendant’s net worth, whichever is less.”
Murphy Homes, Inc. v. Muller, 2007 MT 140 (Mont. 2007).
“” ¶85 The Montana Legislature amended § 27-1-220, MCA, in 2003 to include the 3% limitation on punitive damages.”
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.