Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 28-3-704 (2026)

Contractual Right To Attorney Fees Treated As Reciprocal -- Exception

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 28. CONTRACTS AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS

CHAPTER 3. INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACTS

Part 7. Provisions Implied by Law

Contractual Right To Attorney Fees Treated As Reciprocal -- Exception

28-3-704. Contractual right to attorney fees treated as reciprocal -- exception. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), whenever, by virtue of the provisions of any contract or obligation in the nature of a contract made and entered into at any time after July 1, 1971, one party to the contract or obligation has an express right to recover attorney fees from any other party to the contract or obligation in the event the party having that right brings an action upon the contract or obligation, then in any action on the contract or obligation all parties to the contract or obligation are considered to have the same right to recover attorney fees and the prevailing party in any action, whether by virtue of the express contractual right or by virtue of this section, is entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees from the losing party or parties.

(2) For a contract or obligation negotiated between a private party and a party with condemnation authority over the private party's property, the party with condemnation authority is not entitled to recover attorney fees from the losing party or parties pursuant to subsection (1) in an action to enforce a contract or obligation involving the property.

History: En. Sec. 1, Ch. 259, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 93-8601.1; amd. Sec. 792, Ch. 56, L. 2009; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 313, L. 2017.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 66 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Ritchie v. Town of Ennis Ex Rel. Hernandez, 2004 MT 43 (Mont. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ritchie v. Town of Ennis Ex Rel. Hernandez, 2004 MT 43 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 28× “¶ 30 Regarding the Town's bill of costs, the court held it was not entitled to attorney fees because, contrary to the Town's assertion, the reciprocity of attorney fees provided for by § 28-3-704, MCA, did not apply to the arbitration incentive codified by § 39-2-915, MCA.”

Shull v. First Interstate Bank, 887 P.2d 193 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 44× “Pursuant to § 28-3-704, MCA, the attorney fees provision is reciprocal; consequently, Shull had the same contract rights to attorney fees and costs that First Interstate had.”

Transaction Network, Inc. v. Wellington Tech., Inc., 2000 MT 223 (Mont. 2000). · cites it 26× “On appeal, TANI argues that by successfully defending against Wellington’s breach of contract claim, it is entitled to reciprocal attorney’s fees pursuant to § 28-3-704, MCA. We agree. The relevant language of this statute provides: Whenever, by virtue of the provisions of any…”

Associated Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Ruff, 424 P.3d 571 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 6× “Section 28-3-704(1), MCA. We construe the imprecise language at issue to provide that, in the event of an adjudicated breach of the agreement, the breaching party shall be liable to the non-breaching party for attorney fees incurred to enforce the contract rights of the…”

Chase v. Bearpaw Ranch Ass'n, 2006 MT 67 (Mont. 2006). · cites it 6× “On August 13, 2004, the District Court signed an order granting Bearpaw’s request for attorney fees and scheduling a subsequent hearing to determine the proper amount *424 of attorney fees.”

E.C.A Env't Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Toenyes, 679 P.2d 213 (Mont. 1984). · cites it 9× “Which side was the prevailing party in relation to the promissory note for the purposes of awarding attorney fees under Section 28-3-704, MCA? 4. Did the trial court err by holding the corporate veil of ECA was pierced and MMI was liable on the fertilizer contract? 5.”

Pollard v. City of Bozeman, 741 P.2d 776 (Mont. 1987). · cites it 15× “We find that it did under § 28-3-704, MCA, the reciprocal attorneys' fee statute, which states: 28-3-704.”

Story v. City of Bozeman, 791 P.2d 767 (Mont. 1990). · cites it 4× “This problem, however does not support tort damages. In written contracts, the parties can avoid this inequity by providing in the contract for an award of costs and attorney's fees to the prevailing party.”

Masters Grp. v. Comerica Bank, 2021 MT 161 (Mont. 2021). · cites it 10× “In Weinberg, we noted that “[u]nder Section 28-3-704, MCA, the right to attorney fees is reciprocal to all parties to the contract in any action based on the contract, when the contract provides for attorney fees to any of the parties.”

Baird v. Norwest Bank, 843 P.2d 327 (Mont. 1992). · cites it 6× “Section 28-3-704, MCA, provides that a contractual right to attorney's fees is reciprocal.”

McDonald v. Washington, 862 P.2d 1150 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 7× “Also, appellants argue that respondents’ position that it can recover attorneys’ fees because the parties have a contract relationship which provides for reciprocal attorneys’ fees is erroneous.”

Nw. Nat'l Bank v. Weaver-Maxwell, Inc., 729 P.2d 1258 (Mont. 1986). · cites it 6× “Section 28-3-704, MCA, makes the right to attorney fees reciprocal.”

Show all 66 citing cases →

— Mont. Code Ann. § 28-3-704(1) — 4 cases

Associated Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Ruff, 424 P.3d 571 (Mont. 2018). “Section 28-3-704(1), MCA. We construe the imprecise language at issue to provide that, in the event of an adjudicated breach of the agreement, the breaching party shall be liable to the non-breaching party for attorney fees incurred to enforce the contract rights of the…”

Masters Grp. v. Comerica Bank, 2021 MT 161 (Mont. 2021). “In Weinberg, we noted that “[u]nder Section 28-3-704, MCA, the right to attorney fees is reciprocal to all parties to the contract in any action based on the contract, when the contract provides for attorney fees to any of the parties.”

Kenyon-Noble Lumber Co. v. Dependant Foundations, Inc., 432 P.3d 133 (Mont. 2018).

Jorgensen v. Trademark Woodworks, LLC, 431 P.3d 29 (Mont. 2018).

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.