Table of Contents TITLE 27. CIVIL LIABILITY, REMEDIES, AND LIMITATIONS CHAPTER 2. STATUTES OF LIMITATIONS Part 2. Time Limits on Specific Kinds of Actions
Edition 2021 Other editions
Current Version 2025 2023 2021 2019 2017 2015 2013 2011 2009 2007 2005 2003 2001 1999 1997 1995 1978 Scanned 1979 Scanned 1981 Scanned 1983 Scanned 1985 Scanned 1986 Scanned 1987 Scanned 1989 Scanned
1995 forward is searchable text. Earlier volumes are page scans.
Next
7 27-2-201 32 27-2-202 23 27-2-203 39 27-2-204 11 27-2-205 17 27-2-206 16 27-2-207 5 27-2-208 7 27-2-209 27-2-210 14 27-2-211 27-2-212 27-2-213 27-2-214 27-2-215 3 27-2-216 8 27-2-231

Mont. Code Ann. § 27-2-201 (2)

(2021)

Actions upon judgments

(1) Except as provided in subsections (3) through (5), the period prescribed for the commencement of an action upon a judgment or decree of any court of record of the United States or of any state within the United States is within 10 years.

(2) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action upon a judgment or decree rendered in a court not of record is within 10 years. The cause of action is considered, in that case, to have accrued when final judgment was rendered.

(3) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action to collect past-due child support that has accrued after October 1, 1993, under an order entered by a court of record or administrative authority is within 10 years of the termination of support obligation or within 10 years from entry of a lump-sum judgment or order for support arrears, whichever is later.

(4) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action to collect past-due child support that has accrued under a support order issued in another state, in a foreign country, or in a tribal court is as provided in subsection (3) or as provided in the law of the issuing jurisdiction, whichever period is longer.

(5) An action under 46-18-247(3) to enforce an order of restitution entered by a court of record may be commenced at any time within the offender's lifetime during which restitution remains unpaid.

Opinions construing this section

7 opinions
2024 MT 131N Jun 18, 2024 Affirmed
T. Boudette v. D. Boudette
Majority by Beth Baker · 5 to 0
me for expiration of a judgment lien following the entry of judgment. Instead, the “statute of limitations for the commencement of an action on a judgment is § 27-2-201, MCA, and we have held that statute is the appropriate statute of limitations for the commencement of actions to enforce child support decrees.” In re Marriage of
2022 MT 171N Aug 30, 2022 Affirmed
Laedeke v. Billings Clinic
Majority by Ingrid Gustafson · 5 to 0
March 3, 2017, at the earliest, his February 16-17 requests do not toll the applicable statute of limitations. As, under the statute of limitations provided by § 27-2-201(1), MCA (2013), the MMLP process needed to be initiated by February 27, 2017, at the latest, Randy’s April 3, 2017 filing at the MMLP was too late and his subsequent
2019 MT 268 Nov 12, 2019 Reversed
Oskerson v. Boudette
Majority by Beth Baker · 5 to 0
renewal of the judgment. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 12-1551 (2009). Tammy responded that Montana’s ten-year statute of limitations for actions upon judgments, § 27-2-201(1), MCA, instead applied. The District Court granted Daniel’s motion to extinguish on March 13, 2019. Citing its “exacting” full faith and credit obligation ow
2018 MT 62 Mar 27, 2018 Affirmed
Swmbia v. City of Bozeman
Majority by Ingrid Gustafson · 5 to 0
unenforceable because it is based on an expired judgment. SWMBIA maintains the Consent Decree, issued April 15, 2005, expired April 15, 2015. SWMBIA relies on § 27-2-201(1), MCA, which, notwithstanding exceptions not applicable here, provides that the period prescribed for the commencement of an action upon a judgment or decree rendere
2015 MT 80N Mar 10, 2015 Reversed
Wallace v. Hayes, et al
Majority by Michael E Wheat · 4 to 0
e extended past its 10 year duration only by filing a separate action to obtain a judgment on the judgment.” Jones, 272 Mont. at 325, 900 P.2d at 922 (citing § 27-2-201(1), MCA; Welch, 262 Mont. at 116, 862 P.2d at 1181) (emphasis added). Because Hayes, et al., did not file a separate action and instead requested renewal by motion, th
Official Annotations archive.org, 2021 edition
History:
Ap. p. Sec. 1, p. 172, L. 1889
Amd. Sec. 511, C. Civ. Proc. 1895
Re-en. Sec. 6444, Rev. C. 1907
Re-en. Sec. 9028
R.C.M. 1921
Cal. C. Civ. Proc. Sec. 336
Re-en. Sec. 9028, R.C.M. 1935
Sec. 93-2602, R.C.M. 1947
Ap. p. Sec. 513, C. Civ. Proc. 1895
Amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 157, L. 1901
Amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 128, L. 1903
Re-en. Sec. 6446, Rev. C. 1907
Re-en. Sec. 9030, R.C.M. 1921
Cal. C. Civ. Proc. Sec. 339
Re-en. Sec. 9030, R.C.M. 1935
Amd. Sec. 13, Ch. 263, L. 1975
Sec. 93-2604, R.C.M. 1947
Ap. p. Sec. 510, C. Civ. Proc. 1895
Re-en. Sec. 6443, Rev. C. 1907
Re-en. Sec. 9027, R.C.M. 1921
Cal. C. Civ. Proc. Sec. 335
Re-en. Sec. 9027, R.C.M. 1935
Sec. 93-2601, R.C.M. 1947
R.C.M. 1947, 93-2601(part), 93-2602(1), 93-2604(2)
Amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 631, L. 1993
Amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 60, L. 1995
Amd. Sec. 39, Ch. 125, L. 1995
Amd. Sec. 8, Ch. 264, L. 1995
Amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 101, L. 1999
Amd. Sec. 13, Ch. 515, L. 2001 (HB 496 - Jent, Larry (D) HD 29)
Source text on leg.mt.gov