Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 82-1-201 (2026)

Release Of Record Upon Forfeiture, Cancellation, Or Expiration Of Lease -- Penalty

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 82. MINERALS, OIL, AND GAS

CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Part 2. Cancellation and Forfeiture of Oil, Gas, or Mineral Leases

Release Of Record Upon Forfeiture, Cancellation, Or Expiration Of Lease -- Penalty

82-1-201. Release of record upon forfeiture, cancellation, or expiration of lease -- penalty. (1) When an executed and recorded oil, gas, or other mineral lease is forfeited, canceled, or expires, it is the duty of the lessee, the lessee's successor, or assigns, within 60 days from the date of the forfeiture, cancellation, or expiration of the lease, to have the lease or abstract of the lease released from record in the county where the leased land is situated without cost to the lessor.

(2) A lessee may request the recordation of an assignment or release of more than one lease in a single instrument, and an instrument involving more than one lease made under this subsection must be treated for public recording purposes as a single request from the lessee.

(3) A lessee who fails to comply with subsection (1) within 30 days of written notice from the lessor is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $250.

History: En. Sec. 1, Ch. 22, L. 1917; re-en. Sec. 6902, R.C.M. 1921; re-en. Sec. 6902, R.C.M. 1935; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 218, L. 1971; R.C.M. 1947, 73-114; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 365, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 228, L. 1997.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1983–2006 · leading case: Somont Oil Co., Inc. v. a & G Drilling, Inc., 2006 MT 90 (Mont. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Somont Oil Co., Inc. v. a & G Drilling, Inc., 2006 MT 90 (Mont. 2006). · cites it 4× “Did the District Court err in not awarding Somont its costs and attorney fees pursuant to § 82-1-201, MCA? ¶3 We state C-W’s issues on cross-appeal as follows: 1.”

Miami Oil Producers, Inc. v. Larson, 661 P.2d 1260 (Mont. 1983). · cites it 6× “Additionally, they claimed that Miami failed to release the leasehold or assignment interest which it held within sixty days of forfeit date as required by section 82-1-201, MCA. Miami responded by filing a motion to dismiss for failure to join indispensable parties.”

Irene Perlman, as Substitute for William Perlman v. Pioneer Ltd. P'ship & Kendrick Cattle Co., 918 F.2d 1244 (5th Cir. 1991). “Therefore, we must look to the law of other common-law jurisdictions, as would the state courts in Wyoming, to supply the rules of law.”

— Mont. Code Ann. § 82-1-201(1) — 1 case

Somont Oil Co., Inc. v. a & G Drilling, Inc., 2006 MT 90 (Mont. 2006). “Did the District Court err in not awarding Somont its costs and attorney fees pursuant to § 82-1-201, MCA? ¶3 We state C-W’s issues on cross-appeal as follows: 1.”

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.