27-8-201. Scope of power to render declaratory judgments. Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. No action or proceeding shall be open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect, and such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.
Montana Code Annotated
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-8-201 (2026)
Scope Of Power To Render Declaratory Judgments
✓ current as of May 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 2. Availability of Declaratory Judgments
Scope Of Power To Render Declaratory Judgments
History: En. Sec. 1, Ch. 16, L. 1935; re-en. Sec. 9835.1, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 93-8901.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Thompson v. State, 2007 MT 185 (Mont. 2007).
Thompson v. State, 2007 MT 185 (Mont. 2007). “" Section 27-8-201, MCA. The WCC then determined that the failure of the Legislature to include the WCC in the list of the courts of record enumerated in § 3-1-102, MCA, does not mean that the WCC is not a court of record.”
Ridley v. Guar. Nat'l Ins., 951 P.2d 987 (Mont. 1997). “Section 27-8-201, MCA, of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, provides, in relevant part, as follows: "Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be…”
Donaldson v. State, 2012 MT 288 (Mont. 2012). “” Section 27-8-201, MCA (emphasis added). The declaration “may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect,” and it has “the force and effect of a final judgment or decree.”
Larson v. State, 434 P.3d 241 (Mont. 2019). “" See § 27-8-201, MCA. See also § 27-8-102, MCA (stating remedial purpose of the Act "to settle and to afford relief from uncertainty and insecurity" regarding "rights, status, and other legal relations" and commanding that Act shall "be liberally construed and administered").”
Ppl Montana, LLC v. State, 2010 MT 64 (Mont. 2010). “Section 27-8-201, MCA, of the UDJA reads as follows: Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed.”
Ridley v. Guar. Nat. Ins. Co., 951 P.2d 987 (Mont. 1998). “Section 27-8-201, MCA, of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, provides, in relevant part, as follows: "Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be…”
McDonald v. State, 722 P.2d 598 (Mont. 1986). “Adjudication by this Court now as to the issue raised would serve to guide the Water Court in this particularly important matter; would provide judicial economy in avoiding protracted litigation both in the Water Courts and in this Court; and would serve the public policy of the…”
Puryer v. HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n, 419 P.3d 105 (Mont. 2018). “" Section 27-8-201, MCA. Under Montana law, "a mortgage of real property .”
Chipman v. Nw. Healthcare Corp., 2012 MT 242 (Mont. 2012). “” Section 27-8-201, MCA. Section 27-8-202, MCA, provides: Who may obtain declaratory judgment.”
Safeco Ins. Co. of Illinois v. Montana Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 2000 MT 153 (Mont. 2000). “" Section 27-8-201, MCA. ¶ 32 In accordance with the foregoing statutory language, the declaratory judgment sought by Hill, in theory, actually removed the necessity of his pursuing a Ridley -based UTPA claim.”
Marshall v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Ill., 2018 MT 45 (Mont. 2018). “" Section 27-8-201, MCA. A district court "may refuse to render or enter a declaratory judgment or decree where such judgment or decree, if rendered or entered, would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy.”
Hardy v. Krutzfeldt, 672 P.2d 274 (Mont. 1983). “" Section 27-8-201, MCA. Nevertheless, this Court has on occasion refused to entertain a declaratory judgment action on the ground that no controversy is pending which the judgment would affect, and this Court attempts to avoid rendering advisory opinions.”
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.