Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 85. WATER USE · CHAPTER 2. SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER · Part 2. Adjudication of Water Rights
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234 (2026)

Final Decree

✓ 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 85
  3. CHAPTER 2
  4. Part 2
  5. 85-2-234 Final decree

TITLE 85. WATER USE

CHAPTER 2. SURFACE WATER AND GROUND WATER

Part 2. Adjudication of Water Rights

Final Decree

85-2-234. Final decree. (1) The water judge shall, on the basis of the preliminary decree and any supplemental preliminary decree, on the basis of any hearing that may have been held, and on final resolution of all issue remarks, as defined in 85-2-250, enter a final decree affirming or modifying the preliminary decree.

(2) The terms of a compact negotiated and ratified under 85-2-702 must be included in the final decree without alteration unless an objection is sustained pursuant to 85-2-233. However, the court may not alter or amend any of the terms of a compact except with the prior written consent of the parties in accordance with applicable law.

(3) The final decree must establish the existing rights and priorities within the water judge's jurisdiction of persons who have filed a claim in accordance with 85-2-221 and 85-2-222, of persons required to file a declaration of existing rights in the Powder River basin pursuant to an order of the department or a district court issued under sections 8 and 9 of Chapter 452, Laws of 1973, and of any federal agency or Indian tribe possessing water rights arising under federal law, required by 85-2-702 to file claims.

(4) The final decree must establish, in a form determined to be appropriate by the water judge, one or more tabulations or lists of all water rights and their relative priorities.

(5) The final decree must state the findings of fact, along with any conclusions of law, upon which the existing rights and priorities of each person, federal agency, and Indian tribe named in the decree are based.

(6) For each person who is found to have an existing right arising under the laws of the state of Montana, the final decree must state:

(a) the name and post-office address of the owner of the right;

(b) the amount of water included in the right, as follows:

(i) by flow rate for direct flow rights, such as irrigation rights;

(ii) by volume for rights, such as stockpond and reservoir storage rights, and for rights that are not susceptible to measurement by flow rate; or

(iii) by flow rate and volume for rights that a water judge determines require both volume and flow rate to adequately administer the right;

(c) the date of priority of the right;

(d) the purpose for which the water included in the right is used;

(e) the place of use and a description of the land, if any, to which the right is appurtenant;

(f) the source of the water included in the right;

(g) the place and means of diversion;

(h) the inclusive dates during which the water is used each year;

(i) any other information necessary to fully define the nature and extent of the right.

(7) For each person, tribe, or federal agency possessing water rights arising under the laws of the United States, the final decree must state:

(a) the name and mailing address of the holder of the right;

(b) the source or sources of water included in the right;

(c) the quantity of water included in the right;

(d) the date of priority of the right;

(e) the purpose for which the water included in the right is currently used, if at all;

(f) the place of use and a description of the land, if any, to which the right is appurtenant;

(g) the place and means of diversion, if any; and

(h) any other information necessary to fully define the nature and extent of the right, including the terms of any compacts negotiated and ratified under 85-2-702.

(8) Clerical mistakes in a final decree may be corrected at any time on the initiative of the water judge or on the petition of any person who possesses a water right. The water judge shall order the notice of a correction proceeding that the judge determines to be appropriate to advise all persons who may be affected by the correction. An order of the water judge making or denying a clerical correction is subject to appellate review.

History: En. Sec. 24, Ch. 697, L. 1979; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 667, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 438, L. 1987; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 426, L. 1989; amd. Sec. 7, Ch. 629, L. 1993; amd. Sec. 7, Ch. 526, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 2760, Ch. 56, L. 2009; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 323, L. 2013; amd. Sec. 8, Ch. 338, L. 2017.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1984–2024 · leading case: McDonald v. State, 722 P.2d 598 (Mont. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McDonald v. State, 722 P.2d 598 (Mont. 1986). · cites it 45× “We determine here that the provisions of § 85-2-234, MCA, applicable to final decrees issued by the Water Courts (and also applicable to preliminary decrees under § 85-2-231, MCA), requiring the final decree to state "the amount of water, rate and volume included in the [water]…”
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, 2002 MT 216 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 22× “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Water Court of State, 691 P.2d 833 (Mont. 1985). · cites it 15× “Section 85-2-234(4) (g), MCA. Diversion of water is not required in order to have a valid Indian reserved water right.”
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, 712 P.2d 754 (Mont. 1985). · cites it 11× “Section 85-2-234(2), MCA. *92 The date of priority of an Indian reserved water right depends upon the nature and purpose of the right.”
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, Both Surface & Underground, Within the Sage Creek Drainage Area, 763 P.2d 644 (Mont. 1988). · cites it 18× “We determine in these cases consolidated for appeal that there is no right of appeal granted to a water right claimant under the state water rights adjudication process [Sections 85-2-201, -243, MCA], except from a final decree entered under Section 85-2-234, MCA; that the…”
City of Helena v. Cmty. of Rimini, 2017 MT 145 (Mont. 2017). · cites it 15× “12 Section 85-2-234(6)(3), MCA, states: (6) For each person who is found to have an existing right arising under the laws of the state of Montana, the final decree must state: .”
Curry v. Pondera Cnty. Canal & Reservoir Co., 2016 MT 77 (Mont. 2016). · cites it 17× “Section 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. While we recognize a volume determination may potentially be helpful to Pondera and the ultimate administration of these rights, we 33 are aware of no Montana law, and Pondera has not provided us with any, that requires the Water Court to make a…”
Eldorado Coop Canal Co. v. Lower Teton Jt. Objectors, 2016 MT 94 (Mont. 2016). · cites it 17× “me of water Eldorado may divert from the Teton River for the Eldorado, Truchot, Dennis, and Beattie Rights is limited to no more than 15,000 acre-feet per year? ¶20 Under the WUA, enacted in 1973 for the purpose of adjudicating and determining the extent of water rights in the…”
Teton Coop Canal Co. v. Teton Coop Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 20 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 10× “Thus, the Water Court was within its discretion to limit Teton Canal's water right claims, and it properly quantified the amount of water for each water right to comply with § 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. We conclude that the Water Court's volume assignment is supported by substantial…”
In Re Teton Coop. Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 66 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 5× “Teton Reservoir maintains that substantial evidence supports the Water Court's determination that Teton Reservoir was entitled to carryover storage.”
State Ex Rel. Jones v. Dist. Court of the Fourth Jud. Dist. Ex Rel. Missoula Cnty., 938 P.2d 1312 (Mont. 1997). · cites it 8× “Section 85-2-234, MCA. However, in light of the “over claim” status of claims on Carlton Creek in the Water Court, the Water Court’s Temporary Decree will not effectively establish rights or priorities on Carlton Creek.”
In re the Beneficial Water Use Permit Nos. 66459-76L, Ciotti 64988-g76L, Starner, 923 P.2d 1073 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 4× “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
Show all 23 citing cases →
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(1) — 1 case
Eldorado Coop Canal Co. v. Ben Hog, 2016 MT 145 (Mont. 2016).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(2) — 5 cases
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, 712 P.2d 754 (Mont. 1985). “Section 85-2-234(2), MCA. *92 The date of priority of an Indian reserved water right depends upon the nature and purpose of the right.”
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, 2002 MT 216 (Mont. 2002). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
In re the Beneficial Water Use Permit Nos. 66459-76L, Ciotti 64988-g76L, Starner, 923 P.2d 1073 (Mont. 1996). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
Matter of Beneficial Water Use Permits, 923 P.2d 1073 (Mont. 1996).
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Mt. Water C (Mont. 1986).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(3) — 3 cases
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, 2002 MT 216 (Mont. 2002). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
In re the Beneficial Water Use Permit Nos. 66459-76L, Ciotti 64988-g76L, Starner, 923 P.2d 1073 (Mont. 1996). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
Matter of Beneficial Water Use Permits, 923 P.2d 1073 (Mont. 1996).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(4) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Water Court of State, 691 P.2d 833 (Mont. 1985). “Section 85-2-234(4) (g), MCA. Diversion of water is not required in order to have a valid Indian reserved water right.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(4)(b) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Water Court of State, 691 P.2d 833 (Mont. 1985). “Section 85-2-234(4) (g), MCA. Diversion of water is not required in order to have a valid Indian reserved water right.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(4)(c) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Water Court of State, 691 P.2d 833 (Mont. 1985). “Section 85-2-234(4) (g), MCA. Diversion of water is not required in order to have a valid Indian reserved water right.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(4)(g) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Water Court of State, 691 P.2d 833 (Mont. 1985). “Section 85-2-234(4) (g), MCA. Diversion of water is not required in order to have a valid Indian reserved water right.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(5) — 2 cases
McDonald v. State, 722 P.2d 598 (Mont. 1986). “We determine here that the provisions of § 85-2-234, MCA, applicable to final decrees issued by the Water Courts (and also applicable to preliminary decrees under § 85-2-231, MCA), requiring the final decree to state "the amount of water, rate and volume included in the [water]…”
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, 712 P.2d 754 (Mont. 1985). “Section 85-2-234(2), MCA. *92 The date of priority of an Indian reserved water right depends upon the nature and purpose of the right.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(5)(b) — 1 case
McDonald v. State, 722 P.2d 598 (Mont. 1986). “We determine here that the provisions of § 85-2-234, MCA, applicable to final decrees issued by the Water Courts (and also applicable to preliminary decrees under § 85-2-231, MCA), requiring the final decree to state "the amount of water, rate and volume included in the [water]…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(5)(g) — 1 case
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, 2002 MT 216 (Mont. 2002). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6) — 7 cases
State Ex Rel. Greely v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, 712 P.2d 754 (Mont. 1985). “Section 85-2-234(2), MCA. *92 The date of priority of an Indian reserved water right depends upon the nature and purpose of the right.”
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, 2002 MT 216 (Mont. 2002). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
State Ex Rel. Jones v. Dist. Court of the Fourth Jud. Dist. Ex Rel. Missoula Cnty., 938 P.2d 1312 (Mont. 1997). “Section 85-2-234, MCA. However, in light of the “over claim” status of claims on Carlton Creek in the Water Court, the Water Court’s Temporary Decree will not effectively establish rights or priorities on Carlton Creek.”
Nelson v. Brooks, 2014 MT 120 (Mont. 2014).
Town of Kevin v. MT DNR&C, 2024 MT 210 (Mont. 2024).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(3) — 1 case
City of Helena v. Cmty. of Rimini, 2017 MT 145 (Mont. 2017). “12 Section 85-2-234(6)(3), MCA, states: (6) For each person who is found to have an existing right arising under the laws of the state of Montana, the final decree must state: .”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(b) — 3 cases
Curry v. Pondera Cnty. Canal & Reservoir Co., 2016 MT 77 (Mont. 2016). “Section 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. While we recognize a volume determination may potentially be helpful to Pondera and the ultimate administration of these rights, we 33 are aware of no Montana law, and Pondera has not provided us with any, that requires the Water Court to make a…”
Teton Coop Canal Co. v. Teton Coop Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 20 (Mont. 2018). “Thus, the Water Court was within its discretion to limit Teton Canal's water right claims, and it properly quantified the amount of water for each water right to comply with § 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. We conclude that the Water Court's volume assignment is supported by substantial…”
Eldorado Coop Canal Co. v. Lower Teton Jt. Objectors, 2016 MT 94 (Mont. 2016). “me of water Eldorado may divert from the Teton River for the Eldorado, Truchot, Dennis, and Beattie Rights is limited to no more than 15,000 acre-feet per year? ¶20 Under the WUA, enacted in 1973 for the purpose of adjudicating and determining the extent of water rights in the…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(b)(i) — 2 cases
In Re Teton Coop. Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 66 (Mont. 2018). “Teton Reservoir maintains that substantial evidence supports the Water Court's determination that Teton Reservoir was entitled to carryover storage.”
Teton Coop Canal Co. v. Teton Coop Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 20 (Mont. 2018). “Thus, the Water Court was within its discretion to limit Teton Canal's water right claims, and it properly quantified the amount of water for each water right to comply with § 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. We conclude that the Water Court's volume assignment is supported by substantial…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(b)(iii) — 6 cases
In Re Teton Coop. Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 66 (Mont. 2018). “Teton Reservoir maintains that substantial evidence supports the Water Court's determination that Teton Reservoir was entitled to carryover storage.”
Eldorado Coop Canal Co. v. Lower Teton Jt. Objectors, 2016 MT 94 (Mont. 2016). “me of water Eldorado may divert from the Teton River for the Eldorado, Truchot, Dennis, and Beattie Rights is limited to no more than 15,000 acre-feet per year? ¶20 Under the WUA, enacted in 1973 for the purpose of adjudicating and determining the extent of water rights in the…”
Teton Coop Canal Co. v. Teton Coop Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 20 (Mont. 2018). “Thus, the Water Court was within its discretion to limit Teton Canal's water right claims, and it properly quantified the amount of water for each water right to comply with § 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. We conclude that the Water Court's volume assignment is supported by substantial…”
Curry v. Pondera Cnty. Canal & Reservoir Co., 2016 MT 77 (Mont. 2016). “Section 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. While we recognize a volume determination may potentially be helpful to Pondera and the ultimate administration of these rights, we 33 are aware of no Montana law, and Pondera has not provided us with any, that requires the Water Court to make a…”
Eldorado Coop Canal Co. v. Ben Hog, 2016 MT 145 (Mont. 2016).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(c) — 2 cases
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, 2002 MT 216 (Mont. 2002). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
Teton Coop Canal Co. v. Teton Coop Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 20 (Mont. 2018). “Thus, the Water Court was within its discretion to limit Teton Canal's water right claims, and it properly quantified the amount of water for each water right to comply with § 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. We conclude that the Water Court's volume assignment is supported by substantial…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(e) — 3 cases
City of Helena v. Cmty. of Rimini, 2017 MT 145 (Mont. 2017). “12 Section 85-2-234(6)(3), MCA, states: (6) For each person who is found to have an existing right arising under the laws of the state of Montana, the final decree must state: .”
Curry v. Pondera Cnty. Canal & Reservoir Co., 2016 MT 77 (Mont. 2016). “Section 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. While we recognize a volume determination may potentially be helpful to Pondera and the ultimate administration of these rights, we 33 are aware of no Montana law, and Pondera has not provided us with any, that requires the Water Court to make a…”
Parrot Ditch v. Ashcraft, 2024 MT 272 (Mont. 2024).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(g) — 2 cases
In Re the Adjudication of the Existing Rights to the Use of All the Water, 2002 MT 216 (Mont. 2002). “, § 85-2-224, MCA (statement of claim for federal reserved water rights); § 85-2-234(2), MCA (terms of negotiated Indian water rights compact must be included in final decree without alteration); § 85-2-234(3), MCA (final decree must establish existing rights and priorities of…”
MacK v. Anderson, 2016 MT 204 (Mont. 2016).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 85-2-234(6)(h) — 1 case
Teton Coop Canal Co. v. Teton Coop Reservoir Co., 2018 MT 20 (Mont. 2018). “Thus, the Water Court was within its discretion to limit Teton Canal's water right claims, and it properly quantified the amount of water for each water right to comply with § 85-2-234(6)(b), MCA. We conclude that the Water Court's volume assignment is supported by substantial…”
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.