Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 72. ESTATES, TRUSTS, AND FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIPS · CHAPTER 34. PRINCIPAL AND INCOME · Part 1. Duties of Trustees (Renumbered and Repealed)
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 72-34-103 (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Repealed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
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 72
  3. CHAPTER 34
  4. Part 1
  5. 72-34-103 Repealed

TITLE 72. ESTATES, TRUSTS, AND FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIPS

CHAPTER 34. PRINCIPAL AND INCOME

Part 1. Duties of Trustees (Renumbered and Repealed)

Repealed

72-34-103. Repealed. Sec. 162, Ch. 264, L. 2013.

History: En. Sec. 75, Ch. 685, L. 1989.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 2000–2012 · leading case: In re Charles M. Bair Fam. Trust, 2008 MT 144, 183 P.3d 61.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Charles M. Bair Fam. Trust, 2008 MT 144, 183 P.3d 61. · cites it 4× “¶ 46 Fiduciary duties arise as a matter of law in trustee relationships.”
In re the Est. of Bradshaw, 2001 MT 92, 24 P.3d 211. · cites it 3× “By taking the original position that the annuity was to be distributed among various members of Daniel's family of origin and the later position that each of his sons was entitled to a mere one-tenth share, Mary failed to administer the trust solely in the interests of Danny, Jr.”
In re the Est. of Stukey, 2004 MT 279, 100 P.3d 114. · cites it 3× “Section 72-34-103, MCA; Id. In negotiating the Memorandum of Understanding, Evon Leistiko was required to act as a fiduciary for the best interests of her mother’s estate rather than for her own personal interests.”
In re the Guardianship & Conservatorship of Saylor, 2005 MT 236, 121 P.3d 532. · cites it 4× “They further alleged that Tim had breached his duties to administer the conservatorship solely in Elizabeth’s interest, § 72-34-103, MCA; to avoid a conflict of interest in administering the conservatorship, § 72-34-105, MCA; to take reasonable steps under the circumstances to…”
Hofer v. Montana DPHHS, 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. · cites it 3× “Thus, we conclude that the Hearings Officer's conclusion that an express trust exists was correct.”
In re Est. of Berthot, 2002 MT 277, 59 P.3d 1080. · cites it 3× “" Section 72-34-103(1), MCA. I agree with the beneficiaries that the trustee's conduct in this matter would support a finding that the trustee has breached this duty.”
Fair Hearing of Hofer v. Montana Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. · cites it 3× “Thus, we conclude that the Hearings Officer’s conclusion that an express trust exists was correct.”
Collins v. Norwest Inv. Mgmt. & Trust, 2002 MT 277, 59 P.3d 1080. · cites it 3× “” Section 72-34-103(1), MCA. I agree with the beneficiaries that the trustee’s conduct in this matter would support a finding that the trustee has breached this duty.”
Joseph v. Wilmerding, 874 F. Supp. 2d 951 (D. Mont. 2012). · cites it 2× “The Josephs’ negligence claim presents two legal issues: (1) Did Wilmerding have a duty to purchase homeowner’s insurance for the Josephs’ benefit? and (2) Did Wilmerding have a duty to expeditiously make repairs to the house after the fire? As a threshold matter, the Josephs do…”
Stein v. Zimmer, 2000 MT 185N. · cites it 2× “See § 72-34-103, MCA; see also Moore v. Self (Ga.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 72-34-103(1): 5 cases
In re the Est. of Bradshaw, 2001 MT 92, 24 P.3d 211. “By taking the original position that the annuity was to be distributed among various members of Daniel's family of origin and the later position that each of his sons was entitled to a mere one-tenth share, Mary failed to administer the trust solely in the interests of Danny, Jr.”
Hofer v. Montana DPHHS, 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. “Thus, we conclude that the Hearings Officer's conclusion that an express trust exists was correct.”
In re Est. of Berthot, 2002 MT 277, 59 P.3d 1080. “" Section 72-34-103(1), MCA. I agree with the beneficiaries that the trustee's conduct in this matter would support a finding that the trustee has breached this duty.”
Fair Hearing of Hofer v. Montana Dep't of Pub. Health & Human Servs., 2005 MT 302, 124 P.3d 1098. “Thus, we conclude that the Hearings Officer’s conclusion that an express trust exists was correct.”
Collins v. Norwest Inv. Mgmt. & Trust, 2002 MT 277, 59 P.3d 1080. “” Section 72-34-103(1), MCA. I agree with the beneficiaries that the trustee’s conduct in this matter would support a finding that the trustee has breached this duty.”
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.