Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 32. FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS · CHAPTER 1. BANKS AND TRUST COMPANIES · Part 4. Operation and Regulation
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 32-1-442 (2026)

Repealed

✓ 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 32
  3. CHAPTER 1
  4. Part 4
  5. 32-1-442 Repealed

TITLE 32. FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

CHAPTER 1. BANKS AND TRUST COMPANIES

Part 4. Operation and Regulation

Repealed

32-1-442. Repealed. Sec. 134, Ch. 494, L. 1993.

History: En. Sec. 49, Ch. 89, L. 1927; re-en. Sec. 6014.53, R.C.M. 1935; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 91, L. 1967; R.C.M. 1947, 5-528.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1983–1999 · leading case: Malek v. Patten, 678 P.2d 201 (Mont. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Malek v. Patten, 678 P.2d 201 (Mont. 1984). · cites it 12× “See section 72-1-110, MCA and comment; section 32-1-442, MCA. The Legislature has recognized the validity of the contractual relationship involved in these transactions by relieving banks of liability for paying the proceeds of such accounts according to the terms of the…”
Univ. of Montana v. Coe, 704 P.2d 1029 (Mont. 1985). · cites it 17× “" Section 32-1-442, MCA, concerning ownership of joint bank accounts in Montana, provides in pertinent part: "When a deposit has been made or shall hereafter be made in any bank transacting business in this state in the names of two or more persons, payable to either or payable…”
Stapleton v. First Sec. Bank, 675 P.2d 83 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 6× “Section 32-1-442, MCA. Here the wife had a right by statute to the whole of the face amount of the checks.”
State v. Curtis, 787 P.2d 306 (Mont. 1990). · cites it 4× “We affirmed the District Court's ruling that, as a matter of law, the statute governing joint deposits and joint certificates of deposit, § 32-1-442, MCA, precluded application of theft laws to withdrawals from such accounts.”
State v. Haack, 713 P.2d 1001 (Mont. 1986). · cites it 5× “It is a relationship that may create an equal unrestricted and absolute interest in such co-owners with neither co-owner having an interest to which the other is not entitled.”
Vogele v. Est. of Schock, 745 P.2d 1138 (Mont. 1987). · cites it 3× “Section 32-1-442, MCA. She did not. Elsie’s conduct controls, not the third-party affidavits.”
Dep't of Revenue v. Est. of Dwyer, 771 P.2d 93 (Mont. 1989). · cites it 3× “Section 32-1-442, MCA. The bank is discharged by the receipt or acquittance of the person so paid.”
State v. Kane, 1999 MT 337 (Mont. 1999). · cites it 2× “For guidance, we turned to § 32-1-442, MCA, noting “[w]hen a deposit has been made.”
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.