27-8-202. Who may obtain declaratory judgment. Any person interested under a deed, will, written contract, or other writings constituting a contract or whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract, or franchise may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument, statute, ordinance, contract, or franchise and obtain a declaration of rights, status, or other legal relations thereunder.
Montana Code Annotated
Mont. Code Ann. § 27-8-202 (2026)
Who May Obtain Declaratory Judgment
✓ 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
Who May Obtain Declaratory Judgment
History: En. Sec. 2, Ch. 16, L. 1935; re-en. Sec. 9835.2, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 93-8902.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Larson v. State, 434 P.3d 241 (Mont. 2019).
Larson v. State, 434 P.3d 241 (Mont. 2019). “" Section 27-8-202, MCA (emphasis added). The Legislature was similarly aware that injunctive relief is a supplemental remedy available to further or effect a declaratory judgment.”
Ridley v. Guar. Nat'l Ins., 951 P.2d 987 (Mont. 1997). “" Section 27-8-202, MCA, of the same Act, provides: Any person .”
United Nat'l Ins. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins., 2009 MT 269 (Mont. 2009). “" ¶ 35 The Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act allows for claims to be brought by "[a]ny person interested under a deed, will, written contract, or other writings constituting a contract or whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal…”
Mitchell v. Glacier Cnty., 2017 MT 258 (Mont. 2017). “” Section 27-8-202, MCA. We have held that “the requirement of justiciable controversy [ ] applies to declaratory judgment actions.”
Creveling v. Ingold, 2006 MT 57 (Mont. 2006). “Section 27-8-202, MCA. Where a contract, and by extension a restrictive covenant, has been reduced to writing, the intention of the parties is to be *534 ascertained, if possible, from the writing alone.”
Tarlton v. Kaufman, 2008 MT 462 (Mont. 2008). “Section 27-8-202, MCA. The stated purpose of the Act is "to settle and to afford relief from uncertainty and insecurity with respect to rights, status, and other legal relations and it is to be liberally construed and administered.”
Chipman v. Nw. Healthcare Corp., 2012 MT 242 (Mont. 2012). “Section 27-8-202, MCA, provides: Who may obtain declaratory judgment.”
R. Held v. State, 2024 MT 312 (Mont. 2024). ““Montanans’ right to a clean and healthful environment is contemplated by an affirmative duty upon their government to take active steps to realize 4 Additionally, we have noted that the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, § 27-8-202, MCA, recognizes the justiciability…”
Northfield Ins. v. Montana Ass'n of Counties, 2000 MT 256 (Mont. 2000). “While it is true that § 27-8-202, MCA, specifically affords any person whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a contract the right to have any question of construction or validity of such a contract determined under the Act, a justiciable controversy…”
Hardy v. Krutzfeldt, 672 P.2d 274 (Mont. 1983). “Section 27-8-202, MCA, (a part of the Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act) in pertinent part states: "Any person interested under a .”
Teeter v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 2017 MT 292 (Mont. 2017). “¶14 The Montana Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act provides the following: Any person interested under a deed, will, written contract, or other writings constituting a contract or whose rights, status, or other legal relations are affected by statute, municipal ordinance,…”
Montana Contractors' Ass'n v. Dep't of Highways, 715 P.2d 1056 (Mont. 1986). “On March 25, 1985, the court entered its opinion *1058 and order which found that this was a proper case for declaratory judgment under § 27-8-202, MCA, and also concluded that the motion of the respondents for summary judgment must be granted.”
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.