The Montana Supreme Court issued an opinion Monday in a closely watched environmental case challenging Lincoln County's approval of recreational vehicle park development near sensitive lake ecosystems. In *Thompson Chain of Lakes Stewardship Coalition v. Lincoln County* (2026 MT 8), the high court reviewed a dispute between environmental advocates and county officials over development permitting procedures.
The case stems from Lincoln County's approval of development permits for Happy's RV Park, Inc. and Parks Family Real Estate, LLC. The Thompson Chain of Lakes Stewardship Coalition, a Montana nonprofit public benefit corporation, along with individual plaintiffs James M. Watkins and John W. Wickersham, challenged the county commissioners' decision in district court.
The environmental coalition argued that the Board of County Commissioners of Lincoln County failed to properly conduct environmental review procedures when approving the RV park project. The county commissioners involved in the decision were Brent Teske, Josh Letcher, and Jerry Bennett, who defended their approval process against the legal challenge.
The case originated in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court, where Judge Matthew J. Cuffe presided over the initial proceedings. In March 2025, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of Lincoln County, prompting the environmental coalition to appeal to the state's highest court.
Justice Katherine Bidegaray delivered the Supreme Court's opinion, which was submitted on briefs in December 2025 and decided on Jan. 27, 2026. The case number DA 25-0260 represents one of the court's early decisions for the new year, addressing the growing tension between economic development and environmental protection in Montana.
The legal dispute highlights ongoing challenges facing rural Montana counties as they balance economic development opportunities with environmental stewardship responsibilities. Lincoln County, like many Montana jurisdictions, must navigate complex regulatory frameworks when reviewing development proposals that could impact natural resources.
The Thompson Chain of Lakes Stewardship Coalition was represented by Robert Farris-Olsen and David K. W. Wilson, Jr., from Morrison, Sherwood, Wilson & Deola, PLLP in Helena. The environmental group's legal team argued that the county failed to meet statutory requirements for environmental review of the proposed RV park development.
Lincoln County defended its approval process through counsel Alan F. McCormick from Garlington, Lohn & Robinson, PLLP in Missoula. The county maintained that its commissioners followed proper procedures when evaluating and approving the development application.
Happy's RV Park, Inc. and Parks Family Real Estate, LLC intervened in the case to protect their interests in the approved development project. The companies were represented by Angela M. LeDuc and Austin King from Rocky Mountain Law Partners, P.C. in Kalispell.
The case represents a broader pattern of environmental litigation challenging local government development decisions across Montana. As the state experiences continued population growth and development pressure, conflicts between environmental protection and economic development have become increasingly common in both state and federal courts.
Environmental review requirements under Montana law are designed to ensure that local governments adequately consider potential environmental impacts before approving development projects. The Thompson Chain of Lakes region, known for its pristine water quality and recreational value, has been the subject of increased development interest in recent years.
The Supreme Court's ruling will likely influence how Montana counties approach environmental review procedures for future development projects. County commissioners across the state will be watching the decision's implications for their own development approval processes.
Local governments must balance their statutory obligations for environmental protection with their role in promoting economic development within their jurisdictions. The case illustrates the complex legal landscape that Montana counties navigate when making development decisions that could affect natural resources.
The district court's original grant of summary judgment to Lincoln County suggested that the trial court found the county's procedures adequate under applicable law. However, the Supreme Court's review examined whether that conclusion was legally correct.
The case also demonstrates the active role that citizen groups and nonprofit organizations play in monitoring local government decisions affecting environmental resources. The Thompson Chain of Lakes Stewardship Coalition's challenge reflects growing citizen engagement in environmental protection efforts across Montana.
As Montana continues to experience development pressure in scenic and environmentally sensitive areas, cases like this one will likely become more common. The Supreme Court's opinion provides guidance for how similar disputes should be resolved in the future.
The ruling comes as Montana grapples with balancing its traditional resource-based economy with growing tourism and recreation industries that depend on pristine environmental conditions. County commissioners must increasingly consider these competing interests when making land use decisions.