Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 28. CONTRACTS AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS · CHAPTER 2. CONTRACTS · Part 4. Circumstances Which Affect Validity of Apparent Consent
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-404 (2026)

Kinds Of Fraud

✓ 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 28
  3. CHAPTER 2
  4. Part 4
  5. 28-2-404 Kinds of fraud

TITLE 28. CONTRACTS AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS

CHAPTER 2. CONTRACTS

Part 4. Circumstances Which Affect Validity of Apparent Consent

Kinds Of Fraud

28-2-404. Kinds of fraud. Fraud is either actual or constructive. Actual fraud is always a question of fact.

History: En. Secs. 2116, 2119, Civ. C. 1895; re-en. Secs. 4977, 4980, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Secs. 7479, 7482, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. Civ. C. Secs. 1571, 1574; Field Civ. C. Secs. 756, 759; re-en. Secs. 7479, 7482, R.C.M. 1935; R.C.M. 1947, 13-307, 13-310.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2024 · leading case: Purcell v. Automatic Gas Distributors, Inc., 673 P.2d 1246 (Mont. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Purcell v. Automatic Gas Distributors, Inc., 673 P.2d 1246 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 12× “Section 28-2-404, MCA, states: "Fraud is either actual or constructive.”
Morrow v. Bank of Am., N.A., 2014 MT 117, 324 P.3d 1167. · cites it 4× “We have already noted in our discussion of negligent misrepresentation that the Morrows’ allegations raise genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Bank of America made false representations; whether the Morrows knew of the falsity of the representations; whether the…”
In Re Est. of Kindsfather, 2005 MT 51, 108 P.3d 487. · cites it 3× “Section 28-2-404, MCA. A mere suspicion of fraud is not sufficient, fraud must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Wood v. Anderson, 2017 MT 180, 399 P.3d 304. · cites it 3× “Section 28-2-404, MCA. While we agree with the District Court’s finding that the facts in this case do not support a finding of actual fraud, we conclude that the court’s findings support the Woods’ constructive fraud claim against the Defendants in this case.”
Jenkins v. Hillard, 647 P.2d 354 (Mont. 1982). · cites it 3× “In particular, respondent claims that the contract provision and appellant’s opportunity to inspect the hotel preclude appellant’s right to rely on Hil-lard’s representations, however false.”
Matthews v. Berryman, 637 P.2d 822 (Mont. 1981). · cites it 3× “Section 28-2-404, MCA. To constitute actual fraud under section 28-2-405, MCA, respondent must be found to have induced the Berrymans to sign the documents by: “(1) the suggestion as a fact of that which is not true by one who does not believe it to be true; “(2) the positive…”
Eaton v. Morse, 687 P.2d 1004 (Mont. 1984). · cites it 3× “Section 28-2-404, MCA, states: *242 “Fraud is either actual or constructive.”
Holman v. Hansen, 773 P.2d 1200 (Mont. 1989). · cites it 2× “He cites § 28-2-404, MCA; and Jenkins v. Hillard (1982), 199 Mont.”
Schweigert v. Fowler, 784 P.2d 405 (Mont. 1990). · cites it 3× “Section 28-2-404, MCA. Fraud can never be presumed but must be proved by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Avco Fin. Servs. v. Foreman-Donovan, 772 P.2d 862 (Mont. 1989). · cites it 3× “She also contends that her request was denied so as to extract greater interest payments from her by getting her to sign the renewal note.”
Wright v. Blevins, 705 P.2d 113 (Mont. 1985). · cites it 3× “Section 28-2-404, MCA; Poulsen v. Treasure State Industries, Inc.”
Franks v. Kindsfather, 2005 MT 51, 108 P.3d 487. · cites it 3× “Section 28-2-404, MCA. A mere suspicion of fraud is not sufficient, fraud must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
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.