Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 40. FAMILY LAW · CHAPTER 5. ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT · Part 4. Child Support Enforcement Act Administrative Income Withholding
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 40-5-413 (2026)

Notice Of Income Withholding

✓ 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 5
  4. Part 4
  5. 40-5-413 Notice of income withholding

TITLE 40. FAMILY LAW

CHAPTER 5. ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT

Part 4. Child Support Enforcement Act Administrative Income Withholding

Notice Of Income Withholding

40-5-413. Notice of income withholding. (1) The department shall serve the obligor with a notice if:

(a) income withholding is initiated because of a delinquency;

(b) additional arrearages accrued subsequent to the issuance of an order to withhold and the department proposes to add those arrearages to an existing withholding order; or

(c) immediate withholding or delinquency withholding has commenced for current support and there are arrearages due for a period prior to entry of the order to withhold that the department proposes to add to the withholding order.

(2) The notice must contain a statement:

(a) of the amount subject to withholding, including a computation showing the period and total amount of the arrearages as of the date of the notice;

(b) that withholding applies to all current and subsequent payors;

(c) of the procedures to follow if the obligor desires to contest income withholding on the grounds that the initiation of withholding or the modification of an existing withholding order is improper or that the amount to be withheld is in error due to a mistake of fact, as provided in 40-5-412;

(d) of the period of time within which the obligor is required to file a request for a hearing and that failure to file a request within the time limit will result in income-withholding orders being served upon the payor for the amount stated in the notice; and

(e) in those cases in which withholding is being initiated at the request of an obligee without regard to whether there is a delinquency as provided in 40-5-412(3), a statement that the obligor can require the obligee to appear and show proof that the obligor is not meeting the terms of the alternative arrangement.

(3) The notice must be served upon the obligor personally or by certified mail.

History: En. Sec. 6, Ch. 571, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 10, Ch. 702, L. 1989; amd. Sec. 9, Ch. 635, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 73, Ch. 552, L. 1997; amd. Sec. 75, Ch. 51, L. 1999.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1991–2000 · leading case: Support Obligation of Day v. State, 900 P.2d 296 (Mont. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Support Obligation of Day v. State, 900 P.2d 296 (Mont. 1995). · cites it 2× “To protect the child support debtor’s due process rights, the income withholding process provides for notice of an intent to withhold income, § 40-5-413, MCA, and an opportunity for pre-seizure hearings, § 40-5-414, MCA.”
First v. State ex rel. Laroche, 808 P.2d 467 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 2× “, was duly served a copy as required under § 40-5-413, MCA. In response to this notice, Mr.”
Marriage of Davis v. Davis, 921 P.2d 275 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 2× “On June 26,1995, CSED filed a notice of intent to withhold income pursuant to § 40-5-413, MCA, alleging that Davis was delinquent on his child support obligation in the amount of $44,975.”
Emery v. State Dept. of Pub. Health, 950 P.2d 764 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 2× “, § 40-5-413, MCA (notice of intent to withhold income); § 40-5-414, MCA (hearing on proposed income withholding action); § 40-5-702, MCA (notice of intent to suspend license for nonpayment of child support); § 40-5-703, MCA (hearing on action to suspend license). While each…”
Stenstrom v. Child Support Enforcem, 2000 MT 297N (Mont. 2000). · cites it 2× “The time limit requirements in § 40-5-413, MCA, and 46.30.642(2)(b), ARM, requiring CSED to inform Stenstrom of the hearing results within 45 days are directory, and did not deprive the District Court or the ALJ of jurisdiction.”
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.