DocDraft Logo

Montana Non-Disclosure Agreement Requirements

Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-703 voids any contract restraining a lawful profession, trade, or business, subject only to narrow exceptions for the sale of a business's goodwill and for partnership dissolution, yet since Dobbins, DeGuire and Tucker v.

Introduction

Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-703 voids any contract restraining a lawful profession, trade, or business, subject only to narrow exceptions for the sale of a business's goodwill and for partnership dissolution, yet since Dobbins, DeGuire and Tucker v. Rutherford in 1985 the Montana Supreme Court has enforced non-compete provisions that are reasonable in time and place, supported by real consideration, and that protect the employer without placing an unreasonable burden on the employee or the public. A Montana NDA is otherwise an ordinary, enforceable confidentiality contract, mutual or one-way, in which the parties agree to keep specified information secret. Trade secrets exchanged under an NDA are separately protected by the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Montana Code Annotated Sections 30-14-401 through 30-14-409), and a misappropriation claim generally must be filed within three years of when the misappropriation was discovered or reasonably should have been discovered. Montana has no statute carving an employee's own-time inventions out of an assignment clause, unlike California, Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, North Carolina, Utah, and Washington, so invention ownership in a Montana employment relationship runs on common law and whatever the agreement itself says. The practical effect for drafting is that a Montana NDA's confidentiality definition can safely run broader than a California one before it risks being struck down, though a clause that functions as an actual non-compete still has to satisfy the reasonableness test Montana courts apply to any restraint on someone's ability to work.

0/5000

Key Things to Know

  1. 1

    Trade secret protection runs through the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Montana Code Annotated Sections 30-14-401 through 30-14-409), separate from whatever the NDA itself says.

  2. 2

    Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-703 voids a contract restraining a lawful profession, trade, or business in almost the same words as California's non-compete ban, but Montana courts read it the opposite way. Since Dobbins, DeGuire and Tucker v. Rutherford (1985), a non-compete is enforceable here if it is limited in time or place, supported by real consideration, and reasonable for the employer without unduly burdening the employee or the public.

  3. 3

    That reasonableness test applies to any restraint embedded in a Montana NDA, including an overbroad confidentiality clause that functions like a non-compete. An NDA that protects genuine trade secrets and sensitive information without reaching into what someone can do for a living afterward does not need to fit within Section 28-2-703's narrow express exceptions for selling a business's goodwill (Section 28-2-704) or dissolving a partnership (Section 28-2-705).

  4. 4

    Montana separately bans non-compete restrictions outright for licensed health care providers, including physicians, nurses, physician assistants, psychologists, social workers, counselors, and other Title 37 licensees (Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-724), so an NDA involving a health care professional cannot rely on the general reasonableness test the way other Montana NDAs can.

  5. 5

    A trade secret misappropriation claim in Montana generally must be filed within three years of when the misappropriation was discovered or reasonably should have been discovered, and a continuing misappropriation counts as a single claim rather than a new one each time (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-14-407).

  6. 6

    Montana has no statute requiring an employer to carve an employee's own-time, own-resources inventions out of an assignment clause, unlike California, Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, North Carolina, Utah, and Washington. Invention ownership in a Montana employment relationship runs on common law and whatever the agreement itself says.

  7. 7

    Mutual NDAs, where both sides share confidential information, and one-way NDAs, where only one side does, are both ordinary enforceable contracts in Montana; which one fits depends on whether the exchange runs both directions, like a partnership or acquisition discussion, or one direction, like pitching an investor.

  8. 8

    A Montana court can order injunctive relief to stop an ongoing or threatened misappropriation of a trade secret, in addition to damages, and the injunction lasts only as long as the trade secret advantage itself does (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-14-403).

Key decisions before you file

Before you file a Non-Disclosure Agreement in Montana, a few decisions shape the document: which option to choose and what each one means. The Non-Disclosure Agreement guide walks through them.

Open the Non-Disclosure Agreement guide

Customize your Non-Disclosure Agreement Template with DocDraft

MONTANA NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT

This Non-Disclosure Agreement is entered into by [Party A Name] of [City], Montana and [Party B Name] of [City], Montana (each a "Party") on the terms set out below.

  1. Purpose. This Agreement covers whatever confidential material passes between the Parties while they work on [describe business purpose, e.g. a possible partnership or transaction], regardless of which of them ends up disclosing it.

  2. Definition of Confidential Information. A disclosure counts as "Confidential Information" once the disclosing Party marks it confidential, or once the setting makes clear a reasonable person would treat it that way, broad enough to include any trade secret under the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act's definition (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-14-402). Not everything shared qualifies: material the receiving Party already had, material that later becomes public with no wrongdoing on its part, material a third party was free to hand over without breaching a duty to anyone, and material the receiving Party works out on its own.

  3. Obligations. Confidential Information stays inside the receiving Party's organization unless the disclosing Party gives written approval in advance, and even internally it may be used for nothing beyond what Section 1 describes. The one carve-out is for employees, agents, or advisors whose work actually requires access, provided each carries a confidentiality commitment no looser than this one.

  4. Scope Limitation (Montana-Specific). Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-703 voids a contract restraining a person from a lawful profession, trade, or business, wording nearly identical to California's non-compete statute, yet Montana courts do not read it as a ban. Since Dobbins, DeGuire and Tucker v. Rutherford (1985), a restraint tied to this Agreement is enforceable if limited in time and place, supported by real consideration, and protective of the disclosing Party without unfairly burdening the receiving Party or the public. These confidentiality terms are drafted to satisfy that test, reaching genuine trade secrets and sensitive business information only, never a person's general skill or experience. If either Party is a licensed health care provider under Title 37, Section 28-2-724 overrides the paragraph above: no provision here may restrict that provider from practicing afterward, except for a practice sale or repayment of a relocation, signing, or educational loan.

  5. Federal Whistleblower Notice. Skipping this notice would cost the disclosing Party access to remedies the Defend Trade Secrets Act otherwise makes available against a breaching Party, so it appears here. Under 18 U.S.C. Section 1833(b), a person stays free from criminal or civil exposure for handing a trade secret to a government official or lawyer solely to report or investigate a suspected violation of law, or for placing one in a sealed court record.

  6. Term. Confidentiality duties run [X years] from signing, with one exception: material still qualifying as a trade secret in Montana keeps its protection for as long as its secrecy holds.

  7. Return or Destruction. A written request from the disclosing Party, or the close of the Section 1 relationship, whichever comes first, triggers this duty: the receiving Party must hand back each copy it possesses or certify that all copies have been destroyed.

  8. Remedies. Montana Code Annotated Section 27-19-201 lets a court grant a preliminary injunction once the moving Party shows a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm without relief, and a favorable balance of equities; the non-breaching Party may seek that relief here on top of damages. For a trade secret specifically, Section 30-14-403 lets a court enjoin actual or threatened misappropriation, though the injunction lasts only as long as the trade secret keeps its value.

  9. Governing Law. Montana Code Annotated Section 28-3-102 interprets a contract under the law of the place it is performed or, absent a stated place of performance, the place it was made, and both point to Montana here.

  10. Miscellaneous. Both the federal ESIGN Act (15 U.S.C. Section 7001) and Montana's Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-18-101 et seq.) make an electronic signature on this Agreement as binding as wet ink. Should this Agreement have more than one object and one prove unlawful, Section 28-2-604 keeps the lawful parts standing and voids only the rest. The promises each Party makes the other are themselves the good consideration Section 28-2-801 requires for a valid contract.

[Party A Signature] ____________________ Date: __________ [Party B Signature] ____________________ Date: __________

Montana Requirements for Non-Disclosure Agreement

Definition of Confidential Information (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-14-402)

Clearly defines what constitutes confidential information under Montana law, including trade secrets as defined in the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act.

Trade Secret Protection (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-14-401 through Section 30-14-409, Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act)

Specific provisions addressing the protection of trade secrets in accordance with Montana's adoption of the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, including remedies for misappropriation.

Defend Trade Secrets Act Compliance (18 U.S.C. Section 1833(b))

Includes required notice of immunity under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act for individuals who disclose trade secrets in confidence to government officials or attorneys solely for the purpose of reporting or investigating suspected legal violations.

Economic Espionage Act Considerations (18 U.S.C. Sections 1831 through 1839)

Acknowledges federal protections against theft of trade secrets, including criminal penalties that may apply to violations of the NDA.

Montana Contract Formation Requirements (Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-102)

Ensures the NDA meets Montana's essential elements of a valid contract: identifiable parties capable of contracting, their consent, a lawful object, and sufficient cause or consideration.

Consideration Clause (Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-801)

Explicitly states the consideration provided in exchange for confidentiality obligations, as required for contract validity under Montana law.

Governing Law and Venue (Montana Code Annotated Section 28-3-102 and Section 25-2-118)

Section 28-3-102 sets Montana's choice-of-law default for contract interpretation (the law of the place of performance, or the place made if none is stated), and Section 25-2-118 sets the state's default civil venue rule based on a defendant's residence.

Injunctive Relief (Montana Code Annotated Section 27-19-201)

Provides for injunctive relief in case of breach, consistent with Montana's preliminary injunction standard requiring a likelihood of success on the merits, a likelihood of irreparable harm, and a balance of equities favoring the moving party.

Electronic Signatures Compliance (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-18-101 et seq.; 15 U.S.C. Section 7001 et seq.)

Acknowledges the validity of electronic signatures in accordance with both Montana's Uniform Electronic Transactions Act and the federal ESIGN Act.

Statute of Limitations Notice (Montana Code Annotated Section 27-2-202)

Informs parties of the applicable statute of limitations for breach of written contracts in Montana, which is 8 years from the date of breach.

Restrictive Covenant Reasonableness (Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-703 through Section 28-2-705, and Section 28-2-724)

Ensures any restraint embedded in the NDA satisfies the reasonableness test Montana courts apply under Dobbins, DeGuire and Tucker v. Rutherford, 218 Mont. 392, 708 P.2d 577 (1985), reaffirmed in Junkermier v. Alborn (2016): limited in time and place, supported by real consideration, and not unduly burdensome to the restrained party or the public. Section 28-2-724 separately and categorically bars this kind of restraint for licensed health care providers.

Third-Party Disclosure Limitations (Montana Code Annotated Section 28-10-101 et seq.)

Addresses conditions under which confidential information may be disclosed to third parties, such as employees or agents, consistent with Montana's agency law defining an agent as one who represents a principal in dealings with third persons.

Compliance with Privacy Laws (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-14-2801 et seq., Montana Consumer Data Privacy Act; 45 C.F.R. Section 160 et seq.; 15 U.S.C. Section 6801 et seq.; 15 U.S.C. Section 6501 et seq.)

Ensures the handling of personal information complies with applicable federal privacy laws such as HIPAA, GLBA, or COPPA if relevant to the disclosed information, and with Montana's own Consumer Data Privacy Act, effective October 1, 2024 and amended effective October 1, 2025, when the confidential information includes Montana residents' personal data.

Disclosure Required by Law (Montana Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 45)

Provides procedures for handling situations where disclosure is required by law, court order, or governmental authority, consistent with Montana's subpoena rule, including notice requirements to the disclosing party.

Entire Agreement Clause (Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-905)

States that the NDA constitutes the entire agreement between the parties regarding confidentiality, consistent with Montana's parol evidence rule for written agreements.

Frequently Asked Questions

A Non-Disclosure Agreement in Montana is an ordinary contract in which one or both parties agree to keep specified information confidential. It can be mutual, where both sides share confidential information, or one-way, where only one side does. Trade secrets shared under the agreement are also separately protected by the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Montana Code Annotated Sections 30-14-401 through 30-14-409) regardless of what the NDA itself says.

Generally yes, more so than in a state like California. Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-703 voids contracts restraining a lawful profession, trade, or business in almost the same words as California's ban, but Montana courts do not read it as a categorical prohibition on non-competes. Since Dobbins, DeGuire and Tucker v. Rutherford (1985), a non-compete or a confidentiality clause with non-compete effect is enforceable in Montana if it is limited in time or place, supported by real consideration, and reasonable for the employer without imposing an unreasonable burden on the employee or the public.

Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-703 and California Business and Professions Code Section 16600 both descend from the same nineteenth century Field Civil Code text and use almost identical wording voiding contracts that restrain a lawful profession, trade, or business. California courts, along with Oklahoma and North Dakota, read their version as a near categorical ban on non-competes. Montana courts instead apply a common-law reasonableness test from Dobbins, DeGuire and Tucker v. Rutherford (1985), enforcing a restraint that is limited in time or place, supported by consideration, and not unduly burdensome. A Montana NDA can therefore embed a working non-compete provision that a California NDA generally cannot.

Yes, for licensed health care providers. Montana Code Annotated Section 28-2-724 voids a provision restricting a health care provider, including physicians, nurses, physician assistants, psychologists, social workers, counselors, and other licensed professionals, from practicing after the relationship ends, with exceptions for practice-sale agreements and declining loan or relocation repayment terms. Outside health care, Montana's general reasonableness test under Section 28-2-703 still applies.

A trade secret misappropriation claim under the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act generally must be brought within three years after the misappropriation is discovered, or after it reasonably should have been discovered with reasonable diligence (Montana Code Annotated Section 30-14-407). A continuing misappropriation counts as a single claim rather than restarting the clock each time. A separate breach-of-contract claim over the NDA itself follows Montana's ordinary written-contract limitations period.

Montana has no statute answering this the way California, Delaware, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, North Carolina, Utah, and Washington do. Without a Montana invention-assignment carve-out statute, whether an employee's own-time invention belongs to the employer depends on common-law principles, such as whether the employee was specifically hired to invent, and on the exact wording of the assignment clause in the NDA or employment agreement itself.

It depends on whether confidential information will flow in both directions or only one. A mutual NDA fits a two-way exchange, such as a merger, partnership, or joint-venture discussion where both sides disclose sensitive information. A one-way NDA fits a one-directional exchange, such as pitching a business plan to an investor who is not sharing anything confidential back. Both forms are equally enforceable in Montana; the choice is about which structure matches the actual relationship.

No. A Montana NDA is an ordinary contract, not a formal instrument like a will or power of attorney, so it does not require notarization or witnesses to be valid. It only needs the standard elements of a valid contract: an offer, acceptance, and consideration, along with signatures from the parties being bound.

The non-breaching party can seek injunctive relief to stop an ongoing or threatened disclosure, along with damages caused by the breach. If the disclosed information also qualifies as a trade secret, the Montana Uniform Trade Secrets Act provides an additional, independent basis for relief, including an injunction that lasts only as long as the trade secret advantage itself does, separate from whatever remedies the NDA itself specifies.