Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 70. PROPERTY · CHAPTER 29. PARTITION OF REAL PROPERTY · Part 2. Trial and Judgment
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 70-29-202 (2026)

Court To Order Sale Or Partition -- Appointment Of Referees

✓ 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 70
  3. CHAPTER 29
  4. Part 2
  5. 70-29-202 Court to order sale or partition -- appointment of referees

TITLE 70. PROPERTY

CHAPTER 29. PARTITION OF REAL PROPERTY

Part 2. Trial and Judgment

Court To Order Sale Or Partition -- Appointment Of Referees

70-29-202. Court to order sale or partition -- appointment of referees. (1) If it be alleged in the complaint and established by evidence or if it appear by the evidence without such allegation in the complaint to the satisfaction of the court that the property or any part is so situated that the partition cannot be made without great prejudice to the owners, the court may order a sale thereof; otherwise, upon the requisite proofs being made, it must order a partition according to the respective rights of the parties as ascertained by the court and appoint three referees therefor and must designate the portion to remain undivided for the owners whose interests remain unknown or are not ascertained.

(2) The court, with the consent of the parties, may appoint a single referee instead of three referees in the proceedings under the provisions of this chapter, and the single referee, when thus appointed, has all the powers and may perform all the duties required of the three referees.

History: (1)En. Sec. 503, p. 142, Bannack Stat.; re-en. Sec. 275, p. 192, L. 1867; re-en. Sec. 324, p. 99, Cod. Stat. 1871; re-en. Sec. 375, p. 142, L. 1877; re-en. Sec. 375, 1st Div. Rev. Stat. 1879; re-en. Sec. 388, 1st Div. Comp. Stat. 1887; re-en. Sec. 1355, C. Civ. Proc. 1895; re-en. Sec. 6898, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 9531, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. C. Civ. Proc. Sec. 763; re-en. Sec. 9531, R.C.M. 1935; Sec. 93-6316, R.C.M. 1947; (2)En. Sec. 537, p. 148, Bannack Stat.; re-en. Sec. 309, p. 196, L. 1867; re-en. Sec. 358, p. 104, L. 1871; rep. Sec. 674, p. 215, L. 1877; en. Sec. 1395, C. Civ. Proc. 1895; re-en. Sec. 6938, Rev. C. 1907; re-en. Sec. 9571, R.C.M. 1921; Cal. C. Civ. Proc. Sec. 797; re-en. Sec. 9571, R.C.M. 1935; Sec. 93-6356, R.C.M. 1947; R.C.M. 1947, 93-6316, 93-6356.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Kellogg v. Dearborn Info. Servs., LLC, 2005 MT 188 (Mont. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kellogg v. Dearborn Info. Servs., LLC, 2005 MT 188 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 8× “*92 Section 70-29-202, MCA (emphasis added) 2 .”
Lawrence v. Harvey, 607 P.2d 551 (Mont. 1980). · cites it 6× “” This conclusion is buttressed by the directive in section 70-29-202(1), MCA, that while the court may order a partition sale in appropriate circumstances, it must otherwise order an actual partition upon the requisite proofs being made. “If it be alleged in the complaint and…”
Britton v. Brown, 2013 MT 30 (Mont. 2013). · cites it 5× “¶7 The District Court then appointed three partition referees as agreed upon by the parties and as contemplated by § 70-29-202, MCA. Britton and Brown each were allowed to appoint one referee, and in May 2010 those referees selected the third referee.”
Ark Land Co. v. Harper, 599 S.E.2d 754 (W. Va. 2004). · cites it 2× “340 (Vernon 1953); Mont.Code Ann. § 70-29-202 (West 2003); Neb.”
Frank DeHaan, Inc. v. Gallatin-Madison Ranch Co., 820 P.2d 423 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 3× “Section 70-29-202, MCA, provides the basis for a court’s determination of whether property is suitable for partition or must be sold.”
Palmer v. Palmer, 657 P.2d 92 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 3× “Section 70-29-202(1), MCA, limits partition by sale and division of proceeds to situations where “the property or any part is so situated that the partition cannot be made without great prejudice to the owners.”
Ciotti v. Hoover, 774 P.2d 406 (Mont. 1989). · cites it 7× “§§ 70-29-202(1) and (2), MCA before partitioning the land into three parcels? 2) Did the District Court err by finding that none of the defend *465 ants objected to the appointment of a single referee instead of three referees? 3) Did the District Court err by finding that the…”
Barce v. Filler, 2025 MT 228N (Mont. 2025). “¶6 On July 18, 2022, the District Court appointed three Referees agreed upon by Barce and Filler to determine equitable apportionment of the Property in compliance with §§ 70-29-202, -211, and -405, MCA. On October 5, 2022, after interviewing Barce and Filler and personally…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 70-29-202(1) — 4 cases
Lawrence v. Harvey, 607 P.2d 551 (Mont. 1980). “” This conclusion is buttressed by the directive in section 70-29-202(1), MCA, that while the court may order a partition sale in appropriate circumstances, it must otherwise order an actual partition upon the requisite proofs being made. “If it be alleged in the complaint and…”
Kellogg v. Dearborn Info. Servs., LLC, 2005 MT 188 (Mont. 2005). “*92 Section 70-29-202, MCA (emphasis added) 2 .”
Palmer v. Palmer, 657 P.2d 92 (Mont. 1983). “Section 70-29-202(1), MCA, limits partition by sale and division of proceeds to situations where “the property or any part is so situated that the partition cannot be made without great prejudice to the owners.”
Ciotti v. Hoover, 774 P.2d 406 (Mont. 1989). “§§ 70-29-202(1) and (2), MCA before partitioning the land into three parcels? 2) Did the District Court err by finding that none of the defend *465 ants objected to the appointment of a single referee instead of three referees? 3) Did the District Court err by finding that the…”
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.