In Tidyman’s Management Services, Inc. v. Davis, (Tidyman’s) the Montana Supreme Court neglected to address the underlying issue: whether an insurer’s duty to defend is revocable. Although the Court did not directly address revocability, the holding requires an insurer to provide defense after it acknowledges a duty to defend even if the insurer knows of information that undisputedly negates coverage. Therefore, the Court indirectly held the duty to defend is irrevocable. The holding is consistent with legislative intent.
Carrie Gibadlo, Case Note, Tidyman’s Management Services, Inc. v. Davis: The Duty to Defend Is Irrevocable in Montana, 75 Mont. L. Rev. Online 61, https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr_online/vol75/iss1/12.