If you only remember one point about child custody and parenting time in Montana, remember this: Montana uses Parenting plans allocate decision-making and residential schedules (Montana largely avoids “custody” terminology in favor of parenting plans).. Courts apply best-interests factors under § 40-4-212, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, interaction with family, adjustment to home/school, and mental and physical health. Frequent and continuing contact with both parents is favored when safe; domestic violence findings can limit contact. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off Mont. Code Ann. §§ 40-4-212 to 40-4-219. Relocation: A parent seeking to amend a parenting plan for relocation must show adequate cause and that the change serves the child’s best interests. Modification: A change of circumstances is required to amend a final parenting plan.
Relocation with a child
A parent seeking to amend a parenting plan for relocation must show adequate cause and that the change serves the child’s best interests.
Walking through Montana facts
Use this walkthrough to see which Montana authority does the work at each step.
Two parents in Montana disagree about where the child lives during the school week, and one wants to move.
- Use the labels Montana actually uses: Parenting plans allocate decision-making and residential schedules (Montana largely avoids “custody” terminology in favor of parenting plans)..
- Apply the best-interests factors: Courts apply best-interests factors under § 40-4-212, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, interaction with family, adjustment to home/school, and mental and physical health.
- Check any parenting presumption: Frequent and continuing contact with both parents is favored when safe; domestic violence findings can limit contact.
- If a move is proposed: A parent seeking to amend a parenting plan for relocation must show adequate cause and that the change serves the child’s best interests. Later changes follow: A change of circumstances is required to amend a final parenting plan.
Parenting plans are filed with the petition. Mediation is often ordered. Final decrees adopt a detailed parenting plan under Title 40 chapter 4.
Modifying a Montana custody order
A change of circumstances is required to amend a final parenting plan.
How custody cases typically move in Montana
Parenting plans are filed with the petition. Mediation is often ordered. Final decrees adopt a detailed parenting plan under Title 40 chapter 4.
Related Montana guides
Case law: custody and parenting time in Montana
In RE MARRIAGE OF JEROME ALLEN JOHNSON, Petitioner and Appellant, and BARBARA A. JOHNSON, Respondent and Respondent
…nd her prior decree of dissolution by transferring physical custody of her two children from her former husband, Jerome A. Johnson, to her. After a hearing at which testimony was taken and other evidence received, the District Court adopted Barbara’s proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and entered judgment in her favor granting to her physical custody of her two ch…
Practitioners open In RE MARRIAGE OF JEROME ALLEN JOHNSON, Petitioner and Appellant, and BARBARA A. JOHNSON, Respondent and Respondent when Montana child custody turns on the distinction in this sentence: "nd her prior decree of dissolution by transferring physical custody of her two children from her former husband, Jerome A. Johnson, to her. After a hearing at which testimony was taken and other evidence received, the District Court adopted Barbara’s proposed findings of fact and" Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
IN RE A.R.A., a minor child. PATRICK ERGER, and v. WILLIAM D. ASKREN, JR., and
IN RE A.R.A., a minor child. PATRICK ERGER, and v. WILLIAM D. ASKREN, JR., and, 277 Mont. 66 (1996)
…eenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, awarding custody of A.R.A. to Patrick J. Erger. We reverse and remand to the District Court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. We restate the issues as follows: 1. Did the District Court err in awarding custody of the child to a stepparent over a natural parent based on the best interest of the child test? 2. Did the…
On child custody, IN RE A.R.A., a minor child. PATRICK ERGER, and v. WILLIAM D. ASKREN, JR., and speaks to the Montana dispute in this passage: "Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, awarding custody of A.R.A. to Patrick J. Erger. We reverse and remand to the District Court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. We restate the issues as follows: 1." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
JOHN CHARLES SCHUMAN, Petitioner and Appellant, v. LORRIE DIAN BESTROM, Respondent and Respondent, and J.L.B., Minor
…teenth Judicial District, Yellowstone County, granting sole custody of his son, J.L.B., to the child’s mother, Lorrie Dian Bestrom, and from the visitation schedule of father to child, established by the District Court. John (father) filed his complaint in District Court, seeking to establish his paternity of J.L.B., requesting joint custody, liberal visitation, and provisions…
Montana opinions such as JOHN CHARLES SCHUMAN, Petitioner and Appellant, v. LORRIE DIAN BESTROM, Respondent and Respondent, and J.L.B., Minor are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "Judicial District, Yellowstone County, granting sole custody of his son, J.L.B., to the child’s mother, Lorrie Dian Bestrom, and from the visitation schedule of father to child, established by the District Court." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In Re the MARRIAGE OF SHERRY M. SUSEN, Petitioner and Appellant, and THEODORE C. SUSEN, Respondent and Respondent
…. Sherry M. Susen, petitioner and appellant, appeals from a custody order entered by the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, Missoula County. We affirm. This Court summarizes the issues on appeal as follows: 1. Whether the District Court erred in its decision not to interview the minor child and inquire as to her wishes. 2. Whether the District Court considered the…
On child custody, In Re the MARRIAGE OF SHERRY M. SUSEN, Petitioner and Appellant, and THEODORE C. SUSEN, Respondent and Respondent speaks to the Montana dispute in this passage: "Sherry M. Susen, petitioner and appellant, appeals from a custody order entered by the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, Missoula County. We affirm. This Court summarizes the issues on appeal as follows: 1." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
In Re the MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF J.R.G., a Minor Child
In Re the MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF J.R.G., a Minor Child, 218 Mont. 336 (1985)
…llant’s guardianship of respondent’s minor child and return custody of the child to respondent. We uphold the judgment of the District Court though we modify its conclusions of law regarding the scope of guardianship proceedings and consideration of the best interests of the child. Appellant raises two issues for the Court as follows: 1. Does a natural mother have to prove that…
Montana opinions such as In Re the MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF J.R.G., a Minor Child are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "We uphold the judgment of the District Court though we modify its conclusions of law regarding the scope of guardianship proceedings and consideration of the best interests of the child. Appellant raises two issues for the Court as follows: 1." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In Re the MARRIAGE OF JOHN C. BERGNER, III, Petitioner and Respondent, and ADELA M. (Bergner) OWENS, Respondent and
…warding her and her ex-husband, John C. Bergner, III, joint custody of their two daughters. We affirm the modification. Adela and John Bergner were married on August 11, 1972. Two daughters were born to the couple, Eva on July 26, 1973, and Katheryne Darcy (K.D.) on March 27, 1976. The couple separated in February of 1980. The decree of dissolution was. entered on March 12, 198…
Montana opinions such as In Re the MARRIAGE OF JOHN C. BERGNER, III, Petitioner and Respondent, and ADELA M. (Bergner) OWENS, Respondent and are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "John C. Bergner, III, joint custody of their two daughters. We affirm the modification. Adela and John Bergner were married on August 11, 1972. Two daughters were born to the couple, Eva on July 26, 1973, and Katheryne Darcy (K.D.) on March 27, 1976." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In Re Custody of JMD
In Re Custody of JMD, 857 P.2d 708 (1993)
857 P.2d 708 (1993) In re the CUSTODY OF J.M.D., A Minor Child. Kevin J. FITZGERALD, Petitioner and Respondent, v. Eva Marie BROWN, Respondent and Appellant. No. 92-365. Supreme Court of Montana. Submitted on Briefs February 4, 1993. Decided July 29, 1993. *710 Joan Meyer Nye, Nye & Meyer, Billings, for respondent and appellant. John Bobinski, Hele…
Montana opinions such as In Re Custody of JMD are cited where child custody is disputed. The court stated: "P.2d 708 (1993) In re the CUSTODY OF J.M.D., A Minor Child. Kevin J. FITZGERALD, Petitioner and Respondent, v. Eva Marie BROWN, Respondent and Appellant. No. 92-365. Supreme Court of Montana. Submitted on Briefs February 4, 1993. Decided July 29, 1993." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In RE THE MATTER OF THE CUSTODY OF AND THE PARENTAL RIGHTS OF T.Z. and J.Z., Youths in Need of Care
…stina Osterloth or, alternatively, to grant long-term legal custody of Christina’s children, T.Z. and J.Z., to DPHHS with the right to assign guardianship. The District Court granted DPHHS long-term legal custody of T.Z. and J.Z. with the right to assign guardianship to the children’s grandmother. Christina appeals the District Court’s order. We affirm the order of the District…
In RE THE MATTER OF THE CUSTODY OF AND THE PARENTAL RIGHTS OF T.Z. and J.Z., Youths in Need of Care is worth reading on Montana child custody because the court put the point in its own words: "Osterloth or, alternatively, to grant long-term legal custody of Christina’s children, T.Z. and J.Z., to DPHHS with the right to assign guardianship. The District Court granted DPHHS long-term legal custody of T.Z. and J.Z." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Key takeaways
- Best-interests standard: Courts apply best-interests factors under § 40-4-212, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, interaction with family, adjustment to home/school, and mental and physical health.
- Labels used in Montana: Parenting plans allocate decision-making and residential schedules (Montana largely avoids “custody” terminology in favor of parenting plans)..
- Parenting-time posture: Frequent and continuing contact with both parents is favored when safe; domestic violence findings can limit contact.
- Relocation: A parent seeking to amend a parenting plan for relocation must show adequate cause and that the change serves the child’s best interests.
- Modification: A change of circumstances is required to amend a final parenting plan.
- Primary authority: Mont. Code Ann. §§ 40-4-212 to 40-4-219.
Best-interests factors in Montana
Courts apply best-interests factors under § 40-4-212, including the child’s wishes, parental wishes, interaction with family, adjustment to home/school, and mental and physical health.
Legal custody, physical custody, and parenting time
Parenting plans allocate decision-making and residential schedules (Montana largely avoids “custody” terminology in favor of parenting plans).
Frequent and continuing contact with both parents is favored when safe; domestic violence findings can limit contact.
Frequently asked questions
What does Montana call “custody”?
Parenting plans allocate decision-making and residential schedules (Montana largely avoids “custody” terminology in favor of parenting plans).
Can I move out of state with my child?
A parent seeking to amend a parenting plan for relocation must show adequate cause and that the change serves the child’s best interests.
How do I change an existing custody order in Montana?
A change of circumstances is required to amend a final parenting plan.
This guide covers Montana custody law as of 2026. Verify the live statute and any local parenting-time guidelines before relying on this summary.