39-2-902. Purpose. This part sets forth certain rights and remedies with respect to wrongful discharge. Except as provided in 39-2-912, this part provides the exclusive remedy for a wrongful discharge from employment.
Montana Code Annotated
Mont. Code Ann. § 39-2-902 (2026)
Purpose
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MT-LEGleg.mt.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
TITLE 39. LABOR
CHAPTER 2. THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP
Part 9. Wrongful Discharge From Employment
Purpose
History: En. Sec. 2, Ch. 641, L. 1987; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 583, L. 2001.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49
cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: Meech v. Hillhaven West, Inc., 776 P.2d 488 (Mont. 1989).
Meech v. Hillhaven West, Inc., 776 P.2d 488 (Mont. 1989). “See § 39-2-902, MCA. In place of the prior governing statutes and the common-law causes of action it abrogates, the Act provides a statutorily defined cause of action for wrongful discharge.”
Haynes v. Shodair Child.'s Hosp., 2006 MT 128 (Mont. 2006). “Section 39-2-902, MCA, clearly states that the WDEA sets forth certain rights and remedies with respect to wrongful discharge.”
Burchett v. MasTec North Am., Inc., 2004 MT 177 (Mont. 2004). “" Section 39-2-912(1), MCA. Thus, while a Montana district court generally has subject matter jurisdiction over wrongful discharge claims pursuant to the WDEA, it does not have subject matter jurisdiction over a wrongful discharge claim where other state or federal legislation…”
Whidden v. John S. Nerison, Inc., 1999 MT 110 (Mont. 1999). “Section 39-2-902, MCA, provides in pertinent part that “[ejxcept as limited in this part, employment having no specified term may be terminated at the will of either the employer or the employee on notice to the other for any reason considered sufficient by the terminating party.”
Ritchie v. Town of Ennis Ex Rel. Hernandez, 2004 MT 43 (Mont. 2004). “A version of this statute was first enacted in 1907 and significantly amended in 1921 and 1947.”
Solle v. W. States Ins. Agency, Inc., 2000 MT 96 (Mont. 2000). “" Section 39-2-902, MCA. The WDEA explicitly preempts all common law remedies, providing that "no claim for discharge may arise from tort or express or implied contract.”
Vettel-Becker v. Deaconess Med. Ctr. of Billings, Inc., 2008 MT 51 (Mont. 2008). “Section 39-2-902, MCA. Those exceptions, found at § 39-2-912, MCA, include discharges that are subject to state or federal statutes prohibiting unlawful discrimination and discharge in retaliation for reporting unlawful discrimination.”
Mysse v. Martens, 926 P.2d 765 (Mont. 1996). “Rosebud County and the individual defendants claim that Mysse did not raise any of these issues as separate claims in her amended complaint, except possibly the claim for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing which, according to Rosebud County, is prohibited from…”
Farris v. Hutchinson, 838 P.2d 374 (Mont. 1992). “§ 39-2-902, MCA. The Act was meant to preempt common law remedies.”
MacMillan v. State Comp. Ins. Fund, 947 P.2d 75 (Mont. 1997). “Section 39-2-902, MCA. With the exception of express exemp *205 tions, the WDEA applies by its terms to all wrongful discharges from employment in Montana, including discharges from so-called “at will” employment which otherwise could be terminated for any reason.”
Tonack v. Montana Bank of Billings, 854 P.2d 326 (Mont. 1993). “III Did the District Court incorrectly interpret or misapply the provisions of the Wrongful Discharge Act? The Wrongful Discharge Act provides, at § 39-2-902, MCA: *331 Except as provided in 39-2-912, this part provides the exclusive remedy for a wrongful discharge from…”
Barthel v. Barretts, 2021 MT 232 (Mont. 2021). “Section 39-2-902, MCA. A discharge may be wrongful if it was without good cause.”
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.