27-8-101. Short title. This chapter may be cited as the "Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act".
Montana Code Annotated
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-8-101 (2026)
Short Title
✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MT-LEGleg.mt.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
TITLE 27. CIVIL LIABILITY, REMEDIES, AND LIMITATIONS
CHAPTER 8. UNIFORM DECLARATORY JUDGMENTS ACT
Part 1. General Provisions
Short Title
History: En. Sec. 16, Ch. 16, L. 1935; re-en. Sec. 9835.16, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 93-8916.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 44
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2022 · leading case: Larson v. State, 2019 MT 28, 434 P.3d 241.
Larson v. State, 2019 MT 28, 434 P.3d 241. “Section 27-8-101, et seq. , MCA. The MUDJA provides a legal vehicle to obtain judgments declaring relative "rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”
Gottlob v. DesRosier, 2020 MT 210, 470 P.3d 188. “declaratory judgment pursuant to § 15-1-406(1)(b), MCA, that County Officials levied taxes for tax years 2015-2017 in violation of §§ 7-6-4020, -4021, and -4030, MCA, with prayer for property tax refunds pursuant to § 15-1-408(1), MCA (Count 2), or ensuing tax year levy…”
Skinner Enter., Inc. v. Lewis & Clark Cnty. Bd. of Health, 950 P.2d 733 (Mont. 1997). “Neither the relief sought nor the provisions of § 27-8-101, MCA, envision a review of such a factual dispute.”
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. v. Cumiskey, 665 P.2d 223 (Mont. 1983). “" Section 27-8-101 et seq., MCA. The action, in order to terminate the controversy as to all parties, should include as parties all persons who have or claim any interest that would be affected by the declaration.”
Hardy v. Krutzfeldt, 672 P.2d 274 (Mont. 1983). “Therefore we do not have a justiciable controversy over which the judicial power to determine real controversies may be exercised.”
Harland v. Anderson Ranch Co., 2004 MT 132, 92 P.3d 1160. “¶29 Did the District Court have jurisdiction to consider the effect of the 1983 amended judgment? ¶30 Anderson Ranch argues that the District Court was without jurisdiction to entertain the Harlands’ complaint. Although its brief is unclear, the Ranch’s apparent contention is…”
W. Tradition P'ship, Inc. v. Attorney Gen., 2011 MT 328, 291 P.3d 545. “The Attorney General argued that § 13-35-227(1), MCA, is narrowly tailored because it still allows for lobbying, testimony, and other direct contacts and that the Commissioner of Political Practices has interpreted the law to exclude voluntary associations.”
Galt v. State Dept. of Fish, Wildlife, 731 P.2d 912 (Mont. 1987). “Appellants, plaintiffs below, brought this action for declaratory relief pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, §§ 27-8-101 through 27-8-313, MCA, requesting the District Court to declare §§ 23-2-301, et seq.”
Lee v. State, 635 P.2d 1282 (Mont. 1981). “Section 27-8-101, et seq., MCA. That act provides, in section 27-8-202, MCA: “Any person .”
Thompson v. State, 2007 MT 185, 167 P.3d 867. “¶ 17 The WCC noted that the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act ("UDJA"), codified at §§ 27-8-101 to-313, MCA, provides that "[c]ourts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further…”
Est. of Swanberg, 2020 MT 153, 465 P.3d 1165. “The Swanbergs sought declaratory judgment under § 27-8-101, MCA, that the trust was invalid or void due to Chandler’s lack of testamentary capacity, undue influence, and fraud.”
DuBray v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 2001 MT 251, 36 P.3d 897. “DuBray further contends that his declaratory judgment action was filed *137 pursuant to the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, §§ 27-8-101 through -313, MCA, and not § 33-18-242(6)(b), MCA, and therefore is not a bad faith claim and is not barred.”
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.