Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 27. CIVIL LIABILITY, REMEDIES, AND LIMITATIONS · CHAPTER 5. UNIFORM ARBITRATION ACT · Part 3. Procedure Following Award
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312 (2026)

Vacating An Award

✓ 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 27
  3. CHAPTER 5
  4. Part 3
  5. 27-5-312 Vacating an award

TITLE 27. CIVIL LIABILITY, REMEDIES, AND LIMITATIONS

CHAPTER 5. UNIFORM ARBITRATION ACT

Part 3. Procedure Following Award

Vacating An Award

27-5-312. Vacating an award. (1) Upon the application of a party, the district court shall vacate an award if:

(a) the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means;

(b) there was evident partiality by an arbitrator appointed as a neutral or corruption in any of the arbitrators or misconduct prejudicing the rights of any party;

(c) the arbitrators exceeded their powers;

(d) the arbitrators refused to postpone the hearing upon sufficient cause being shown or refused to hear evidence material to the controversy or otherwise conducted the hearing, contrary to the provisions of 27-5-213, in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party;

(e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined in proceedings under 27-5-115 and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or

(f) a neutral arbitrator failed to make a material disclosure required by 27-5-116. An award may be vacated because of a material noncompliance with 27-5-116 no later than 90 days following discovery of the failure to disclose.

(2) The fact that the relief could not or would not be granted by a court of law or equity is not grounds for vacating or refusing to confirm the award.

(3) An application under this section must be made within 90 days after delivery of a copy of the award to the applicant, except that if it is predicated upon corruption, fraud, or other undue means, it must be made within 90 days after the grounds are known or should have been known.

(4) In vacating the award on grounds other than those stated in subsection (1)(e), the court may order a rehearing before new arbitrators chosen as provided in the agreement or, if the agreement does not provide a method of selection, by the court in accordance with 27-5-211 or, if the award is vacated on grounds set forth in subsection (1)(c) or (1)(d), the court may order a rehearing before the arbitrators who made the award or their successors appointed in accordance with 27-5-211. The time within which the agreement requires the award to be made is applicable to the rehearing and commences on the date of the order for rehearing.

(5) If the application to vacate is denied and a motion to modify or correct the award is not pending, the court shall confirm the award.

History: En. Sec. 15, Ch. 684, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 339, L. 2009.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case: Terra West Townhomes, L.L.C. v. Stu Henkel Realty, 2000 MT 43 (Mont. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Terra West Townhomes, L.L.C. v. Stu Henkel Realty, 2000 MT 43 (Mont. 2000). · cites it 35× “Conversely, Terra West, Dillon Management and Consulting, and the Dillons moved the District Court to vacate the arbitrator's award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA (1997), on the grounds that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers and had disregarded Montana law.”
Nelson v. Livingston Rebuild Ctr., Inc., 1999 MT 116 (Mont. 1999). · cites it 42× “DISCUSSION ¶ 9 Did the District Court err when it remanded the case to the arbitrator for reconsideration of damages? ¶ 10 Nelson contends that the District Court could not enter judgment for the amended award because it erred when it remanded the case to the arbitrator.”
May v. First Nat'l Pawn Brokers, Ltd., 887 P.2d 185 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 32× “Did the District Court abuse its discretion in refusing to vacate the award pursuant to *188 § 27-5-312, MCA, on the basis of evident partiality? FNP argues that the award, or the Arbitrator's conduct, shows evident partiality and, thus, that the award must be vacated pursuant…”
Geissler v. Sanem, 949 P.2d 234 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 30× “Two of our recent cases discussed a district court's scope of review of an arbitration award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA. We stated in both Duchscher v.”
Paulson v. Flathead Conservation Dist., 2004 MT 136 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 10× “Section 75-7-121, MCA, provides that a party who disagrees with a decision of the supervisors of a conservation district must appeal that decision to a panel of arbitrators.”
Dick Anderson Constr., Inc. v. Monroe Constr. Co., 2009 MT 416 (Mont. 2009). · cites it 12× “¶27 The grounds for vacating an arbitration award are set forth in § 27-5-312, MCA: Vacating an award. (1) Upon the application of a party, the district court shall vacate an award if: (a) the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means; (b) there was evident…”
Duchscher v. Vaile, 887 P.2d 181 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 16× “The District Court refused to modify or vacate the general damages award, stating that it lacked the power under Montana's Uniform Arbitration Act, §§ 27-5-312 and -313, MCA, to modify the arbitration award.”
Greater Missoula Area Fed'n of Early Childhood Educators & Related Pers. v. Child Start, Inc., 2009 MT 362 (Mont. 2009). · cites it 4× “Likewise, there is no basis under Montana law for Child Start’s proposition that an arbitrator may not resolve a dispute which does not constitute a “case or controversy” under Article VII, Section 4(1). Along these same lines, we note that an arbitrator has broad power to…”
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). · cites it 43× “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Wells Fargo Bank v. Talmage, 2007 MT 45 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 4× “See § 27-5-312, MCA. As Wells Fargo has waited much longer than that, Talmage insists Wells Fargo is barred from challenging the NAC award and the District Court must confirm the award.”
Stockade Enter. v. Ahl, 905 P.2d 156 (Mont. 1995). · cites it 8× “Section 27-5-312, MCA, provides: Vacating an award.”
Bank of Am., Na (usa) v. Dahlquist, 2007 MT 32 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 8× “” Further, Dahlquist points out that an invalid arbitration, including where “there was no arbitration agreement,” is specifically contemplated under § 27-5-312, MCA. Thus, under Montana law, BOA had ninety days to challenge the award, even though it claims that the award is…”
Show all 24 citing cases →
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(1): 7 cases
Paulson v. Flathead Conservation Dist., 2004 MT 136 (Mont. 2004). “Section 75-7-121, MCA, provides that a party who disagrees with a decision of the supervisors of a conservation district must appeal that decision to a panel of arbitrators.”
Geissler v. Sanem, 949 P.2d 234 (Mont. 1997). “Two of our recent cases discussed a district court's scope of review of an arbitration award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA. We stated in both Duchscher v.”
Duchscher v. Vaile, 887 P.2d 181 (Mont. 1994). “The District Court refused to modify or vacate the general damages award, stating that it lacked the power under Montana's Uniform Arbitration Act, §§ 27-5-312 and -313, MCA, to modify the arbitration award.”
May v. First Nat'l Pawn Brokers, Ltd., 887 P.2d 185 (Mont. 1994). “Did the District Court abuse its discretion in refusing to vacate the award pursuant to *188 § 27-5-312, MCA, on the basis of evident partiality? FNP argues that the award, or the Arbitrator's conduct, shows evident partiality and, thus, that the award must be vacated pursuant…”
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(1)(a): 2 cases
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
MBNA Am. Bank v. TRAMELLI, 2008 MT 372 (Mont. 2008).
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(1)(b): 8 cases
Geissler v. Sanem, 949 P.2d 234 (Mont. 1997). “Two of our recent cases discussed a district court's scope of review of an arbitration award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA. We stated in both Duchscher v.”
May v. First Nat'l Pawn Brokers, Ltd., 887 P.2d 185 (Mont. 1994). “Did the District Court abuse its discretion in refusing to vacate the award pursuant to *188 § 27-5-312, MCA, on the basis of evident partiality? FNP argues that the award, or the Arbitrator's conduct, shows evident partiality and, thus, that the award must be vacated pursuant…”
Paulson v. Flathead Conservation Dist., 2004 MT 136 (Mont. 2004). “Section 75-7-121, MCA, provides that a party who disagrees with a decision of the supervisors of a conservation district must appeal that decision to a panel of arbitrators.”
Tedesco v. Home Sav. Bancorp, Inc., 2017 MT 304 (Mont. 2017).
Terra West Townhomes, L.L.C. v. Stu Henkel Realty, 2000 MT 43 (Mont. 2000). “Conversely, Terra West, Dillon Management and Consulting, and the Dillons moved the District Court to vacate the arbitrator's award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA (1997), on the grounds that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers and had disregarded Montana law.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(1)(c): 4 cases
Terra West Townhomes, L.L.C. v. Stu Henkel Realty, 2000 MT 43 (Mont. 2000). “Conversely, Terra West, Dillon Management and Consulting, and the Dillons moved the District Court to vacate the arbitrator's award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA (1997), on the grounds that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers and had disregarded Montana law.”
Nelson v. Livingston Rebuild Ctr., Inc., 1999 MT 116 (Mont. 1999). “DISCUSSION ¶ 9 Did the District Court err when it remanded the case to the arbitrator for reconsideration of damages? ¶ 10 Nelson contends that the District Court could not enter judgment for the amended award because it erred when it remanded the case to the arbitrator.”
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Weeden Constr. v. Simbeck, 2022 MT 149 (Mont. 2022).
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(2): 7 cases
Greater Missoula Area Fed'n of Early Childhood Educators & Related Pers. v. Child Start, Inc., 2009 MT 362 (Mont. 2009). “Likewise, there is no basis under Montana law for Child Start’s proposition that an arbitrator may not resolve a dispute which does not constitute a “case or controversy” under Article VII, Section 4(1). Along these same lines, we note that an arbitrator has broad power to…”
Nelson v. Livingston Rebuild Ctr., Inc., 1999 MT 116 (Mont. 1999). “DISCUSSION ¶ 9 Did the District Court err when it remanded the case to the arbitrator for reconsideration of damages? ¶ 10 Nelson contends that the District Court could not enter judgment for the amended award because it erred when it remanded the case to the arbitrator.”
Langemeier v. Kuehl, 2001 MT 306 (Mont. 2001).
Duchscher v. Vaile, 887 P.2d 181 (Mont. 1994). “The District Court refused to modify or vacate the general damages award, stating that it lacked the power under Montana's Uniform Arbitration Act, §§ 27-5-312 and -313, MCA, to modify the arbitration award.”
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(3): 2 cases
Dick Anderson Constr., Inc. v. Monroe Constr. Co., 2009 MT 416 (Mont. 2009). “¶27 The grounds for vacating an arbitration award are set forth in § 27-5-312, MCA: Vacating an award. (1) Upon the application of a party, the district court shall vacate an award if: (a) the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means; (b) there was evident…”
Bank of Am., Na (usa) v. Dahlquist, 2007 MT 32 (Mont. 2007). “” Further, Dahlquist points out that an invalid arbitration, including where “there was no arbitration agreement,” is specifically contemplated under § 27-5-312, MCA. Thus, under Montana law, BOA had ninety days to challenge the award, even though it claims that the award is…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(4): 2 cases
Nelson v. Livingston Rebuild Ctr., Inc., 1999 MT 116 (Mont. 1999). “DISCUSSION ¶ 9 Did the District Court err when it remanded the case to the arbitrator for reconsideration of damages? ¶ 10 Nelson contends that the District Court could not enter judgment for the amended award because it erred when it remanded the case to the arbitrator.”
Terra West Townhomes, L.L.C. v. Stu Henkel Realty, 2000 MT 43 (Mont. 2000). “Conversely, Terra West, Dillon Management and Consulting, and the Dillons moved the District Court to vacate the arbitrator's award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA (1997), on the grounds that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers and had disregarded Montana law.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(l)(a): 1 case
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(l)(b): 4 cases
May v. First Nat'l Pawn Brokers, Ltd., 887 P.2d 185 (Mont. 1994). “Did the District Court abuse its discretion in refusing to vacate the award pursuant to *188 § 27-5-312, MCA, on the basis of evident partiality? FNP argues that the award, or the Arbitrator's conduct, shows evident partiality and, thus, that the award must be vacated pursuant…”
Paulson v. Flathead Conservation Dist., 2004 MT 136 (Mont. 2004). “Section 75-7-121, MCA, provides that a party who disagrees with a decision of the supervisors of a conservation district must appeal that decision to a panel of arbitrators.”
Terra West Townhomes, L.L.C. v. Stu Henkel Realty, 2000 MT 43 (Mont. 2000). “Conversely, Terra West, Dillon Management and Consulting, and the Dillons moved the District Court to vacate the arbitrator's award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA (1997), on the grounds that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers and had disregarded Montana law.”
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(l)(c): 5 cases
Terra West Townhomes, L.L.C. v. Stu Henkel Realty, 2000 MT 43 (Mont. 2000). “Conversely, Terra West, Dillon Management and Consulting, and the Dillons moved the District Court to vacate the arbitrator's award pursuant to § 27-5-312, MCA (1997), on the grounds that the arbitrator had exceeded his powers and had disregarded Montana law.”
Nelson v. Livingston Rebuild Ctr., Inc., 1999 MT 116 (Mont. 1999). “DISCUSSION ¶ 9 Did the District Court err when it remanded the case to the arbitrator for reconsideration of damages? ¶ 10 Nelson contends that the District Court could not enter judgment for the amended award because it erred when it remanded the case to the arbitrator.”
Dick Anderson Constr., Inc. v. Monroe Constr. Co., 2009 MT 416 (Mont. 2009). “¶27 The grounds for vacating an arbitration award are set forth in § 27-5-312, MCA: Vacating an award. (1) Upon the application of a party, the district court shall vacate an award if: (a) the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means; (b) there was evident…”
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Roberts v. Lame Deer Pub. Sch. Dist. 6, 2013 MT 358 (Mont. 2013).
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(l)(d): 1 case
Dick Anderson Constr., Inc. v. Monroe Constr. Co., 2009 MT 416 (Mont. 2009). “¶27 The grounds for vacating an arbitration award are set forth in § 27-5-312, MCA: Vacating an award. (1) Upon the application of a party, the district court shall vacate an award if: (a) the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or other undue means; (b) there was evident…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(lXa): 1 case
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(lXb): 1 case
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-5-312(lXc): 1 case
City of Livingston v. Montana Pub. Employees Ass'n, 2014 MT 314 (Mont. 2014). “in a manner that substantially prejudiced the rights of a party; (e) there was no arbitration agreement and the issue was not adversely determined . . . and the party did not participate in the arbitration hearing without raising the objection; or (f) a neutral arbitrator failed…”
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.