Will I automatically receive an asset if my spouse fails to disclose?

Full disclosure is required by law in Montana when going through a dissolution.

While the statute does give the court discretion to award an undisclosed asset to the other party, this does not mean that the court will always do so.  It is within the court's discretion.

A Montana Supreme Court case discussing this topic is: In Re Marriage of Gerhart, 2003 MT 292, 78 P.3d 1219 (2003).

In this case, the husband received a bonus and profit-sharing award and deposited the funds in an investment bank account.  The husband then failed to disclose this account in his Final Declaration of Disclosure.  The counsel for the wife requested the husband's W-2 forms for the year 2001, and the husband amended his disclosure to include the account.  The wife received this amended disclosure only 2 days before trial.

Kevin testified that he had forgotten about the account, and had accidentally omitted the bonus and profit-sharing award, having placed his W-2 tax form in an envelope marked for his 2001 taxes without looking at it.
The District Court acknowledged the account containing the bonus and profit-sharing award, but decided not to include this account as a marital asset to be divided.

The wife appealed to the Supreme Court of Montana because the District Court denied her motion for amendment of the property distribution.

The Supreme Court discussed Section 40-4-253(4), MCA, which provides that a party's failure to disclose an asset on his or her final disclosure declaration is presumed to be grounds for the court to award the undisclosed asset to the other party separate from the equitable division of the marital estate.   Therefore, it is clear that the statute authorizes a court to award undisclosed assets to the opposing party.

The question here is, is a court required to? The Supreme Court of Montana found that the statute only creates a presumption.

The following is the court's reasoning:  ¶ 20 "Section 26-1-601, MCA, sets forth a list of conclusive presumptions, including “any other presumption, which, by statute, is expressly made conclusive,” while § 26-1-602, MCA, provides that all other presumptions are disputable and may be controverted by other evidence.  Section 40-4-253(4), MCA, on which Kimberly [the wife] relies, does not state that the presumption therein is conclusive.   Consequently, the presumption at issue is disputable."

Since the husband had given testimony as to his reasoning why he was late in disclosing this account, it was within the District Court's discretion to decide whether the husband's testimony was credible.
Since the District Court accepted the husband's explanation, the Supreme Court declined to disturb the decision, as the Supreme Court determined that the District Court did not abuse its discretion.

You can see this case here: In Re Marriage of Gerhart

Therefore, the presumption that failure to disclose an asset is grounds to award the asset to the other party is now considered disputable.  This means that you will not necessarily be awarded an asset the other party fails to disclose.  It will depend on the facts of the case, and it will be up to the court to decide what is proper.