Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 40. FAMILY LAW · CHAPTER 15. PARTNER AND FAMILY MEMBER ASSAULT, SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND STALKING -- VICTIM PROTECTION · Part 2. Order of Protection
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 40-15-202 (2026)

Order Of Protection -- Hearing -- Evidence

✓ 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 40
  3. CHAPTER 15
  4. Part 2
  5. 40-15-202 Order of protection -- hearing -- evidence

TITLE 40. FAMILY LAW

CHAPTER 15. PARTNER AND FAMILY MEMBER ASSAULT, SEXUAL ASSAULT, AND STALKING -- VICTIM PROTECTION

Part 2. Order of Protection

Order Of Protection -- Hearing -- Evidence

40-15-202. Order of protection -- hearing -- evidence. (1) A hearing must be conducted within 20 days from the date that the court issues a temporary order of protection. The hearing date may be continued at the request of either party for good cause or by the court. If the hearing date is continued, the temporary order of protection must remain in effect until the court conducts a hearing. At the hearing, the court shall determine whether good cause exists for the temporary order of protection to be continued, amended, or made permanent.

(2) The respondent may request an emergency hearing before the end of the 20-day period by filing an affidavit that demonstrates that the respondent has an urgent need for the emergency hearing. An emergency hearing must be set within 3 working days of the filing of the affidavit.

(3) The order of protection may not be made mutually effective by the court. The respondent may obtain an order of protection from the petitioner only by filing an application for an order of protection and following the procedure described in this chapter.

(4) (a) Except as provided in subsection (4)(b), evidence concerning a victim's sexual conduct is not admissible in a hearing under this section.

(b) Evidence of a victim's past sexual conduct with the offender or evidence of specific instances of the victim's sexual activity to show the origin of semen, pregnancy, or disease may be admitted in a hearing under this section only if that sexual conduct is at issue in the hearing.

(5) If a respondent proposes to offer evidence subject to subsection (4)(b), the trial judge shall order a separate hearing to determine whether the proposed evidence is admissible under subsection (4)(b).

History: En. Sec. 24, Ch. 350, L. 1995; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 484, L. 1997; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 311, L. 1999.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1999–2025 · leading case: In Re the Marriage of Coogler, 2004 MT 122 (Mont. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Marriage of Coogler, 2004 MT 122 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 20× “In this motion counsel cited § 40-15-202, MCA, and argued that said order should be dismissed because Mr.”
Schiller v. Schiller, 2002 MT 103 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 6× “We hold that the District Court properly omitted Kyle from its Amended Order under §§ 40-15-202 and -204, MCA, and § 40-4-212, MCA.”
Marriage of Lundstrom & Scholz, 2007 MT 304 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 6× “Scholz also later filed in District Court a motion to dismiss the protective order.”
Lear v. Jamrogowicz, 2013 MT 147 (Mont. 2013). · cites it 6× “Section 40-15-202(1), MCA. Prior to the hearing, Jamrogowicz moved to vacate the scheduled hearing to allow her to conduct discovery, and agreed to the terms of the TOP until the rescheduled hearing was held.”
Bardsley v. Pluger, 2015 MT 301 (Mont. 2015). · cites it 4× “Specifically, § 40-15-202(1), MCA, requires a court to conduct a show cause hearing before issuing a permanent order of protection wherein the respondent is permitted to testify and introduce evidence.”
Keller v. Trull, 2007 MT 108 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 7× “¶9 Section 40-15-102(4), MCA, requires that in cases where a petition for an order of protection is filed, a guardian must be appointed for a minor respondent when such is required by M.”
Marriage of Lockhead, 2013 MT 368 (Mont. 2013). · cites it 2× “CONCLUSION ¶24 The District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying Brian’s Motion to Vacate the Permanent Order of Protection.”
In Re the Marriage of Christian, 1999 MT 189 (Mont. 1999). · cites it 4× “Dana argued that § 40-15-202(3), MCA 1 , precluded issuance of a restraining order against him where only he had requested that relief against Nancy.”
Hennon v. Weber, 2025 MT 260 (Mont. 2025). · cites it 12× “A court must conduct a hearing within twenty days from the issuance of the temporary order of protection to “determine whether good cause exists for a temporary order of protection to be continued, 5 amended, or made permanent.”
K.d.r.-m v. R.E.M., 2004 MT 292 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 5× “” Further, the mother argues that § 40-15-202(1), MCA, explicitly requires an evidentiary hearing regarding temporary orders of protection.”
Marriage of Adams, 2023 MT 95N (Mont. 2023). · cites it 2× “8 ¶28 Pursuant to § 40-15-202(1), MCA, a district court has the discretion to “determine whether good cause exists for [a] temporary order of protection to be continued, amended, or made permanent,” following a hearing.”
Wendy Schoonen v. Ryan Reichle, 2007 MT 356N (Mont. 2007). · cites it 5× “Given these circumstances, Reichle has waived his opportunity to challenge the statutory basis for the filing of the petition by Schoonen which resulted in the Justice Court’s issuance of the First Order. ¶10 In the alternative, Reichle asserts that the Second and Third Orders…”
Show all 26 citing cases →
Mont. Code Ann. § 40-15-202(1): 21 cases
In Re the Marriage of Coogler, 2004 MT 122 (Mont. 2004). “In this motion counsel cited § 40-15-202, MCA, and argued that said order should be dismissed because Mr.”
Marriage of Lundstrom & Scholz, 2007 MT 304 (Mont. 2007). “Scholz also later filed in District Court a motion to dismiss the protective order.”
Schiller v. Schiller, 2002 MT 103 (Mont. 2002). “We hold that the District Court properly omitted Kyle from its Amended Order under §§ 40-15-202 and -204, MCA, and § 40-4-212, MCA.”
Lear v. Jamrogowicz, 2013 MT 147 (Mont. 2013). “Section 40-15-202(1), MCA. Prior to the hearing, Jamrogowicz moved to vacate the scheduled hearing to allow her to conduct discovery, and agreed to the terms of the TOP until the rescheduled hearing was held.”
Bardsley v. Pluger, 2015 MT 301 (Mont. 2015). “Specifically, § 40-15-202(1), MCA, requires a court to conduct a show cause hearing before issuing a permanent order of protection wherein the respondent is permitted to testify and introduce evidence.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 40-15-202(3): 2 cases
In Re the Marriage of Christian, 1999 MT 189 (Mont. 1999). “Dana argued that § 40-15-202(3), MCA 1 , precluded issuance of a restraining order against him where only he had requested that relief against Nancy.”
Kendall v. Stambaugh, 2012 MT 64N (Mont. 2012).
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.