Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 37. PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS · CHAPTER 4. DENTISTRY AND DENTAL HYGIENE · Part 3. Licensing
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 37-4-328 (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Repealed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 37
  3. CHAPTER 4
  4. Part 3
  5. 37-4-328 Repealed

TITLE 37. PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS

CHAPTER 4. DENTISTRY AND DENTAL HYGIENE

Part 3. Licensing

Repealed

37-4-328. Repealed. Sec. 10, Ch. 366, L. 2023.

History: En. Sec. 11, Ch. 48, L. 1935; re-en. Sec. 3115.11, R.C.M. 1935; amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 34, L. 1961; amd. Sec. 84, Ch. 350, L. 1974; R.C.M. 1947, 66-911.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1991–1994 · leading case: State, Bd. of Dentistry v. Kandarian, 813 P.2d 409 (Mont. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State, Bd. of Dentistry v. Kandarian, 813 P.2d 409 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 20× “When the Board sought an injunction in the District Court, it put itself in the role of litigant or advocate, not adjudicator.”
Newville v. State, Dept. of Fam. Servs., 883 P.2d 793 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 2× “2d 409 , the Board of Dentistry was proceeding against a nonlicensee under § 37-4-328(3), MCA, which did not require an administrative hearing before the Board of Dentistry under MAPA.”
Smith v. Butte-Silver Bow Cnty., 878 P.2d 870 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 4× “der § 10-2-214, MCA; • representing election judges in challenges to electors under § 13-13-305, MCA; • filing actions to enjoin a public nuisance under § 16-6-313, MCA; • prosecuting or defending actions by or against a school district or community college district under §…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 37-4-328(3): 2 cases
State, Bd. of Dentistry v. Kandarian, 813 P.2d 409 (Mont. 1991). “When the Board sought an injunction in the District Court, it put itself in the role of litigant or advocate, not adjudicator.”
Newville v. State, Dept. of Fam. Servs., 883 P.2d 793 (Mont. 1994). “2d 409 , the Board of Dentistry was proceeding against a nonlicensee under § 37-4-328(3), MCA, which did not require an administrative hearing before the Board of Dentistry under MAPA.”
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.