Hansen v. Scott
Michelle Hansen, Stacey Hanson, and
Michelle Hansen, as Personal
Representative of the Estates of
Gordon and Barbara Erickstad, Plaintiffs and Appellants
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,
South Central Judicial District,
Judge Gail Hagerty
|Nature of Action:||Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)|
|Term:||02/2002  Argument: 02/26/2002|
|ND cite:||2002 ND 101|
645 N.W.2d 223
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
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|
|1||08/06/2001 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 08/02/2001|
|2||08/10/2001 ANNOUNCED DISQUALIFICATION: Sandstrom, Dale V.|
|3||08/10/2001 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 08/07/2001|
|4||08/10/2001 RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL (Mary Richer): 09/26/2001|
|5||09/19/2001 RECORD ON APPEAL|
|6||09/26/2001 TRANSCRIPT DATED April 9, 2001|
|7||10/19/2001 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF|
|8||10/20/2001 ACTION BY CLERK (MAT). Granted: 12/05/2001|
|9||12/06/2001 APPELLANT BRIEF,with attached Addendum|
|10||12/06/2001 APPELLANT APPENDIX|
|11||12/06/2001 DISK - atb|
|12||01/02/2002 Affidavit in Compliance with Rule 11.1(e) - Charles K. Eldred|
|13||01/04/2002 MOTION AND BRIEF TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE (Exhibit 1 attached)|
|14||01/04/2002 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Mot. to file amicus curiae brief/no OA). Granted|
|15||01/04/2002 AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF|
|16||01/04/2002 DISK - ACB|
|17||01/09/2002 APPELLEE BRIEF|
|18||01/18/2002 DISK - AEB|
|19||01/25/2002 MOTION and Brief to Exceed Word Limit for RYB|
|20||01/28/2002 SITTING WITH THE COURT: Bohlman, Bruce E.|
|21||01/29/2002 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (Word limit for RYB extended to 2500 words). Granted|
|22||01/29/2002 REPLY BRIEF of Appellants|
|23||01/29/2002 DISK - ryb|
|24||02/26/2002 APPEARANCES: Timothy Q. Purdon; Charles K. Eldred, Daniel J. Hovland|
|25||02/26/2002 ARGUED: Purdon; Eldred (Vol. X; Page 206)|
|26||02/26/2002 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|27||06/10/2002 DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED|
|28||06/10/2002 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Kapsner, Carol Ronning|
|29||06/10/2002 (CONCUR IN RESULT): VandeWalle, Gerald W.: CON/RES|
|30||06/10/2002 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellant|
|31||06/10/2002 Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|32||06/21/2002 PETITION FOR REHEARING|
|33||07/30/2002 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. Denied|
|35||11/01/2002 Appellee's Motion to Recall & Stay Mandate Pending Petition for Certiorari w/copy of|
|36||11/01/2002 Petition for Writ of Certiorari|
|37||11/05/2002 Letter from Clerk of US Supreme Court dated 11-1-02 RE: Petition for Writ of Certiorari is placed|
|38||11/05/2002 on docket as No. 02-657|
|39||11/06/2002 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (MOT/Recall & Stay Mandate). Denied|
|40||01/21/2003 Letter dated 1-13-03 from Clerk of U.S. Supreme Court informing us the petition for a writ of|
|41||01/21/2003 certiorari is denied|
|42||08/12/2002 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|43||09/19/2007 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|