Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 72-33-201 (2026)

Repealed

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 72. ESTATES, TRUSTS, AND FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIPS

CHAPTER 33. TRUST CODE GENERAL PROVISIONS (Repealed)

Part 2. Creation and Validity of Trusts Resulting and Constructive Trusts (Repealed)

Repealed

72-33-201. Repealed. Sec. 162, Ch. 264, L. 2013.

History: En. Sec. 9, Ch. 685, L. 1989.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1993–2014 · leading case: Hofer v. Montana DPHHS, 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098.
Hofer v. Montana DPHHS, 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. · cites it 17× “¶ 17 DPHHS argues that under the provisions of § 72-33-201, MCA, an express trust exists between KCR and the Colony members.”
Cowan v. Cowan, 2004 MT 97, 89 P.3d 6. · cites it 6× “A trust may be created by "a transfer of property by the owner during the owner's lifetime to another person as trustee," § 72-33-201(2), MCA, and may also be created by "an enforceable promise to create a trust" at a future time.”
Fair Hearing of Hofer v. Montana Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. · cites it 17× “¶17 DPHHS argues that under the provisions of § 72-33-201, MCA, an express trust exists between KCR and the Colony members.”
Cate-Schweyen v. Cate, 2000 MT 345, 15 P.3d 467. · cites it 12× “¶20 As a preliminary matter, we shall first dispense with the fundamentally flawed argument that the trust document at issue was testamentary.”
In re Trust of Jameison, 2000 MT 190, 8 P.3d 83. · cites it 12× “Section 72-33-201, MCA. In addition, a trust is created only if "the trustor properly manifests an intention to create a trust," "there is trust property" and "there is a beneficiary.”
Schmidt v. Bolich, 2000 MT 190, 8 P.3d 83. · cites it 12× “Section 72-33-201, MCA. In addition, a trust is created only if “the trustor properly manifests an intention to create a trust,” “there is trust property’ and “there is a beneficiary.”
New Hope Lutheran Ministry v. Faith Lutheran Church of Great Falls, Inc., 2014 MT 69, 328 P.3d 586. · cites it 3× “” Section 72-33-201, MCA (2009). A trust could be created “only if the trustor properly manifests an intention to create a trust,” § 72-33-202, MCA (2009), and was subject to the requirements of the statute of frauds if not created by operation of law, § 72-33-208, MCA (2009).”
Matter of Est. of Bolinger, 943 P.2d 981 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 2× “Nevertheless, for purposes of this opinion, we do not believe that this distinction as to the type of trust created is of particular importance,where the central issue—whether the testator's intent is manifest from the language used and the facts found—is the same and is…”
Zrubek v. Zrubek (In Re Zrubek), 149 B.R. 631 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1993). · cites it 4× “2d at 1399 , Mont.Code Ann. §§ 72-33-201 through 207, require a trustor, an intention to create a trust, designation of trust property, a legal trust purpose and a designated beneficiary.”
Martinson v. Towe (In Re Towe), 173 B.R. 197 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1994). · cites it 3× “Mont.Code Ann. § 72-33-201 to 209. Under California law, the elements of an express trust include “a competent trustor, an intention on the part of the trustor to create a trust, a trustee, an estate conveyed to the trustee, an acceptance of the trust by the trustee, a…”
Boehm v. Cokedale, LLC, 2011 MT 224, 261 P.3d 994. · cites it 2× “While a trust may be created by the declaration of a property owner that he holds the property as a trustee, § 72-33-201(1), MCA, creation of that trust is “[s]ubject to other provisions” of the trust code.”
Martinson v. James (In Re James), 186 B.R. 262 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1995). · cites it 3× “Montana adopted a new Trust Code in 1989, patterned generally after the California Probate Code Ann.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 72-33-201(1): 3 cases
Hofer v. Montana DPHHS, 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. “¶ 17 DPHHS argues that under the provisions of § 72-33-201, MCA, an express trust exists between KCR and the Colony members.”
Fair Hearing of Hofer v. Montana Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. “¶17 DPHHS argues that under the provisions of § 72-33-201, MCA, an express trust exists between KCR and the Colony members.”
Boehm v. Cokedale, LLC, 2011 MT 224, 261 P.3d 994. “While a trust may be created by the declaration of a property owner that he holds the property as a trustee, § 72-33-201(1), MCA, creation of that trust is “[s]ubject to other provisions” of the trust code.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 72-33-201(2): 6 cases
Cowan v. Cowan, 2004 MT 97, 89 P.3d 6. “A trust may be created by "a transfer of property by the owner during the owner's lifetime to another person as trustee," § 72-33-201(2), MCA, and may also be created by "an enforceable promise to create a trust" at a future time.”
Hofer v. Montana DPHHS, 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. “¶ 17 DPHHS argues that under the provisions of § 72-33-201, MCA, an express trust exists between KCR and the Colony members.”
Fair Hearing of Hofer v. Montana Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. “¶17 DPHHS argues that under the provisions of § 72-33-201, MCA, an express trust exists between KCR and the Colony members.”
In re Trust of Jameison, 2000 MT 190, 8 P.3d 83. “Section 72-33-201, MCA. In addition, a trust is created only if "the trustor properly manifests an intention to create a trust," "there is trust property" and "there is a beneficiary.”
Schmidt v. Bolich, 2000 MT 190, 8 P.3d 83. “Section 72-33-201, MCA. In addition, a trust is created only if “the trustor properly manifests an intention to create a trust,” “there is trust property’ and “there is a beneficiary.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 72-33-201(5): 1 case
Cowan v. Cowan, 2004 MT 97, 89 P.3d 6. “A trust may be created by "a transfer of property by the owner during the owner's lifetime to another person as trustee," § 72-33-201(2), MCA, and may also be created by "an enforceable promise to create a trust" at a future time.”
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.