Hansen v. Scott
Michelle Hansen, as Personal
Representative of the Estates of
Gordon and Barbara Erickstad, Plaintiffs and Appellants
v.
Wayne Scott, Ray Parra, Rey
Selvera, William H. Brooks,
Cathy Doyle, Veronica Ballard,
Carl Jeffries, Ethel White,
Larry Hermance, Cynthia Lyons, Defendants and Appellees
---------
Robert R. Lawrence, John Doe #1,
John Doe #2, John Doe #3,
John Doe #4, and John Doe #5,
individually, Defendants
Judge Gail Hagerty
| Appellant: | Dickson Law Office | |
| Appellee: | Lawyer not licensed in N.D. , Att. General Office | |
| Amicus curiae: | Ken R. Sorenson , Att. General Office | |
| Appellee: | Smith Bakke Porsborg Schweigert & Armstrong |
Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download.
I. North Dakota has personal jurisdiction over the Texas Defendants pursuant to the long-arm provision of N.D.R.Civ.P. 4(b)(2)(C) and the District Court's decision that there is no personal jurisdiction over the Texas Defendants in the matter should be reversed.
A. The requirements of N.D.R.Civ.P. 4(b)(2)(C) are satisfied in this case.
B. The Texas Defendants had a duty to exercise reasonable care in connection with Defendant Lawrence's parole.
C. The First Amended Complaint sufficiently alleges that the Texas Defendants are "persons who acted directly or by an agent" as required in Rule 4(b)(2).
II. The District Court's Rule 54(b) certification was proper.
III. If this Court concludes the District Court abused its discretion in granting Rule 54(b) certification, then this Court should issue a supervisory writ reversing the District Court's finding that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the Texas Defendants.
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF ISSUES:
I. Whether the state of North Dakota should exercise long-arm jurisdiction over employees of a sending state in the administration of the Interstate Compact for the Supervision of Parolees and Probationers.
a. Whether administration of the Interstate Compact for the Supervision of Parolees and Probationers satisfies the minimum contacts requirement necessary to exercise personal jurisdiction
b. Whether there may be a tort cause of action against a sending states' compact administrators and parole and probation officers after a case has been transferred for supervision to a receiving state.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. Whether this appeal should be dismissed due to improper Rule 54(b) certification.
II. Whether North Dakota's long-arm statute applies to this case.
III. Whether North Dakota may, consistent with due process, assert personal jurisdiction over the Texas Defendants.
Add Docket 20010195 RSS