Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 41. MINORS · CHAPTER 3. CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT · Part 4. Abuse or Neglect Proceedings
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437 (2026)

Adjudication -- Temporary Disposition -- Findings -- Order

✓ 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 41
  3. CHAPTER 3
  4. Part 4
  5. 41-3-437 Adjudication -- temporary disposition -- findings -- order

TITLE 41. MINORS

CHAPTER 3. CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT

Part 4. Abuse or Neglect Proceedings

Adjudication -- Temporary Disposition -- Findings -- Order

41-3-437. Adjudication -- temporary disposition -- findings -- order. (1) Upon the filing of an appropriate petition, an adjudicatory hearing must be held within 90 days of a show cause hearing under 41-3-432. Adjudication may take place at the show cause hearing if the requirements of subsection (2) are met or may be made by prior stipulation of the parties pursuant to 41-3-434 and order of the court. Exceptions to the time limit may be allowed only in cases involving newly discovered evidence, unavoidable delays, stipulation by the parties pursuant to 41-3-434, and unforeseen personal emergencies.

(2) The court may make an adjudication on a petition under 41-3-422 if the court determines by a preponderance of the evidence, except as provided in the federal Indian Child Welfare Act or the Montana Indian Child Welfare Act provided for in Title 41, chapter 3, part 13, if applicable, that the child is a youth in need of care. Except as otherwise provided in this part, the Montana Rules of Civil Procedure and the Montana Rules of Evidence apply to adjudication and to an adjudicatory hearing. Adjudication must determine the nature of the abuse and neglect and establish facts that resulted in state intervention and upon which disposition, case work, court review, and possible termination are based.

(3) The court shall hear evidence regarding the residence of the child, paternity, if in question, the whereabouts of the parents, guardian, or nearest adult relative, and any other matters the court considers relevant in determining the status of the child. Hearsay evidence of statements made by the affected youth is admissible according to the Montana Rules of Evidence.

(4) The court shall hear offered evidence, including evidence offered by a person appearing pursuant to 41-3-422(9)(a) or (9)(b), regarding any of the following subjects:

(a) the extent to which the child has been cared for, nurtured, or supported by a person other than the child's parents; and

(b) whether the child was placed or allowed to remain by the parents with another person for the care of the child, and, if so, then the court shall accept evidence regarding:

(i) the intent of the parents in placing the child or allowing the child to remain with that person;

(ii) the continuity of care the person has offered the child by providing permanency or stability in residence, schooling, and activities outside of the home; and

(iii) the circumstances under which the child was placed or allowed to remain with that other person, including:

(A) whether a parent requesting return of the child was previously prevented from doing so as a result of an order issued pursuant to Title 40, chapter 15, part 2, or of a conviction pursuant to 45-5-206; and

(B) whether the child was originally placed with the other person to allow the parent to seek employment or attend school.

(5) In all civil and criminal proceedings relating to abuse or neglect, the privileges related to the examination or treatment of the child do not apply, except the attorney-client privilege granted by 26-1-803 and the mediation privilege granted by 26-1-813.

(6) (a) If the court determines that the child is not an abused or neglected child, the petition must be dismissed and any order made pursuant to 41-3-427 or 41-3-432 must be vacated.

(b) If the child is adjudicated a youth in need of care, the court shall set a date for a dispositional hearing to be conducted within 20 days, as provided in 41-3-438(1), and order any necessary or required investigations. The court may issue a temporary dispositional order pending the dispositional hearing. The temporary dispositional order may provide for any of the forms of relief listed in 41-3-427(2).

(7) (a) Before making an adjudication, the court may make oral findings, and following the adjudicatory hearing, the court shall make written findings on issues, including but not limited to the following:

(i) which allegations of the petition have been proved or admitted, if any;

(ii) whether there is a legal basis for continued court and department intervention; and

(iii) whether the department has made reasonable efforts to avoid protective placement of the child or to make it possible to safely return the child to the child's home.

(b) The court may order:

(i) terms for visitation, support, and other intrafamily communication pending disposition if the child is to be placed or to remain in temporary out-of-home care prior to disposition;

(ii) examinations, evaluations, or counseling of the child or parents in preparation for the disposition hearing that does not require an expenditure of money by the department unless the court finds after notice and a hearing that the expenditure is reasonable and that resources are available for payment. The department is the payor of last resort after all family, insurance, and other resources have been examined.

(iii) the department to evaluate the noncustodial parent or relatives as possible caretakers, if not already done;

(iv) the perpetrator of the alleged child abuse or neglect to be removed from the home to allow the child to remain in the home; and

(v) the department to continue efforts to notify noncustodial parents.

(8) If a proceeding under this chapter involves an Indian child and is subject to the federal Indian Child Welfare Act or the Montana Indian Child Welfare Act, a qualified expert witness is required to testify that the continued custody of the Indian child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the Indian child.

History: En. 10-1312 by Sec. 8, Ch. 328, L. 1974; R.C.M. 1947, 10-1312; amd. Sec. 19, Ch. 543, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 567, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 659, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 14, Ch. 458, L. 1995; amd. Sec. 8, Ch. 516, L. 1997; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 481, L. 1999; amd. Sec. 10, Ch. 566, L. 1999; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 194, L. 2001; amd. Sec. 9, Ch. 281, L. 2001; amd. Sec. 10, Ch. 311, L. 2001; Sec. 41-3-404, MCA 1999; redes. 41-3-437 by Sec. 17(2), Ch. 281, L. 2001; amd. Sec. 11, Ch. 504, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 55, Ch. 130, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 349, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 4, Ch. 210, L. 2009; amd. Sec. 38, Ch. 716, L. 2023; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 146, L. 2025.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 62 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: In re H.T., 2015 MT 41 (Mont. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re H.T., 2015 MT 41 (Mont. 2015). · cites it 19× “Whether the termination of Mother’s rights must he reversed because the District Court failed to hold an adjudicatory hearing that complied with § 41-3-437, MCA. 2. Whether the District Courts failure to follow statutory requirements for proceedings subject to the Indian Child…”
In re D.A., 2003 MT 109 (Mont. 2003). · cites it 8× “was a youth in need of care under § 41-3-437, MCA. ¶25 Once the court determined that D.”
In re B.S., 2009 MT 98 (Mont. 2009). · cites it 8× “as youth in need of care absent a request for that particular relief in the petitions for TIA and emergency protective services? *90 ¶17 The father points out that § 41-3-422(l)(a), MCA, requires that “[plroceedings under this chapter must be initiated by the filing of a…”
In re M.B., 2004 MT 304 (Mont. 2004). · cites it 10× “¶17 Section 41-3-437, MCA, provides that a child’s adjudication as a youth in need of care may occur upon a hearing in which the court determines the same by a preponderance of the evidence.”
In re T.C., 2001 MT 264 (Mont. 2001). · cites it 4× “A court may only make such a finding through an adjudicatory hearing as mandated by § 41-3-437, MCA. See In re M.J.W., ¶12 (citing § 41-3-404, MCA (1997), which the Montana Legislature renumbered in October 2001 to § 41-3-437, MCA).”
In re A.D.B., 2013 MT 167 (Mont. 2013). · cites it 4× “¶86 In those circumstances, the court has the responsibility to determine whether the children are youths in need of care, § 41-3-437, MCA, and ultimately decide an appropriate disposition for that child, § 41-3-438, MCA.”
In re K.J.B., 2007 MT 216 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 7× “” Section 41-3-437(2), MCA, requires, in relevant part: The court may make an adjudication on a petition under 41-3-422 if the court determines by a preponderance of the evidence .”
In re G.S., 2002 MT 245 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 2× “The children were adjudicated as youths in need of care, and DPHHS was granted temporary legal custody for a period of 180 days.”
In re M.J., 2013 MT 60 (Mont. 2013). · cites it 3× “Section 41-3-437(2), MCA; I.B., ¶ 20; In re B.”
In re T.S.B., 2008 MT 23 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 2× “’ ” (Quoting § 41-3-437(2), MCA.) C.B. argues that since the District Court must resolve an evidentiary question at the adjudication hearing, he should be entitled to such a hearing and the State should not get to bypass this stage simply because there are prior terminations…”
In re J.J.L., 2010 MT 4 (Mont. 2010). · cites it 7× “¶17 The adjudication provisions in § 41-3-437, MCA, are required to determine and facilitate the best interest of the child.”
In re T.W.F., 2009 MT 207 (Mont. 2009). · cites it 2× “Under §41-3-437, MCA and 25 U.S.C. §1912 (of the ICWA) a court may adjudicate an Indian child to be a youth in need of care if there is clear and convincing evidence that the child is abused and neglected.”
Show all 62 citing cases →
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(1) — 7 cases
In re H.T., 2015 MT 41 (Mont. 2015). “Whether the termination of Mother’s rights must he reversed because the District Court failed to hold an adjudicatory hearing that complied with § 41-3-437, MCA. 2. Whether the District Courts failure to follow statutory requirements for proceedings subject to the Indian Child…”
In re B.S., 2009 MT 98 (Mont. 2009). “as youth in need of care absent a request for that particular relief in the petitions for TIA and emergency protective services? *90 ¶17 The father points out that § 41-3-422(l)(a), MCA, requires that “[plroceedings under this chapter must be initiated by the filing of a…”
In re B.W.S., 2014 MT 198 (Mont. 2014).
In re M.C., 403 P.3d 1266 (Mont. 2017).
Matter of H.T. YINC, 2015 MT 41 (Mont. 2015).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(2) — 30 cases
In re H.T., 2015 MT 41 (Mont. 2015). “Whether the termination of Mother’s rights must he reversed because the District Court failed to hold an adjudicatory hearing that complied with § 41-3-437, MCA. 2. Whether the District Courts failure to follow statutory requirements for proceedings subject to the Indian Child…”
In re M.B., 2004 MT 304 (Mont. 2004). “¶17 Section 41-3-437, MCA, provides that a child’s adjudication as a youth in need of care may occur upon a hearing in which the court determines the same by a preponderance of the evidence.”
In re D.A., 2003 MT 109 (Mont. 2003). “was a youth in need of care under § 41-3-437, MCA. ¶25 Once the court determined that D.”
In re M.J., 2013 MT 60 (Mont. 2013). “Section 41-3-437(2), MCA; I.B., ¶ 20; In re B.”
In re T.S.B., 2008 MT 23 (Mont. 2008). “’ ” (Quoting § 41-3-437(2), MCA.) C.B. argues that since the District Court must resolve an evidentiary question at the adjudication hearing, he should be entitled to such a hearing and the State should not get to bypass this stage simply because there are prior terminations…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(3) — 4 cases
In re H.T., 2015 MT 41 (Mont. 2015). “Whether the termination of Mother’s rights must he reversed because the District Court failed to hold an adjudicatory hearing that complied with § 41-3-437, MCA. 2. Whether the District Courts failure to follow statutory requirements for proceedings subject to the Indian Child…”
In re O.A.W., 2007 MT 13 (Mont. 2007).
In Re Oaw, 2007 MT 13 (Mont. 2007).
Matter of H.T. YINC, 2015 MT 41 (Mont. 2015).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(3)(d) — 2 cases
In re S.S., 2012 MT 78 (Mont. 2012).
In Re Ss, 2012 MT 78 (Mont. 2012).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(4) — 5 cases
In re J.B., 2015 MT 342 (Mont. 2015).
Matter of J.B. YINC, 2015 MT 342 (Mont. 2015).
Matter of R.J.F., YINC, 2026 MT 125 (Mont. 2026).
Matter of I.R.S. & M.w.a.h., Yincs, 2025 MT 139 (Mont. 2025).
Matter of R.J.F., YINC, 2026 MT 125 (Mont. 2026).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(6)(b) — 2 cases
In re G.S., 2002 MT 245 (Mont. 2002). “The children were adjudicated as youths in need of care, and DPHHS was granted temporary legal custody for a period of 180 days.”
In Re Gs, 2002 MT 245 (Mont. 2002).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(7) — 1 case
Matter of A.R. I.R., 2002 MT 343N (Mont. 2002).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(7)(a) — 9 cases
In re D.A., 2003 MT 109 (Mont. 2003). “was a youth in need of care under § 41-3-437, MCA. ¶25 Once the court determined that D.”
In re B.S., 2009 MT 98 (Mont. 2009). “as youth in need of care absent a request for that particular relief in the petitions for TIA and emergency protective services? *90 ¶17 The father points out that § 41-3-422(l)(a), MCA, requires that “[plroceedings under this chapter must be initiated by the filing of a…”
In re K.J.B., 2007 MT 216 (Mont. 2007). “” Section 41-3-437(2), MCA, requires, in relevant part: The court may make an adjudication on a petition under 41-3-422 if the court determines by a preponderance of the evidence .”
In re A.R., 2005 MT 23 (Mont. 2005).
Matter of A.R. I.R., 2002 MT 343N (Mont. 2002).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(7)(a)(i) — 2 cases
In re A.R., 2005 MT 23 (Mont. 2005).
Matter of A.R., 2005 MT 23 (Mont. 2005).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(7)(b)(ii) — 2 cases
In re M.C., 403 P.3d 1266 (Mont. 2017).
Matter of M.C. YINC, 2017 MT 252 (Mont. 2017).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-437(7)(i) — 2 cases
In re A.R., 2005 MT 23 (Mont. 2005).
Matter of A.R., 2005 MT 23 (Mont. 2005).
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.