Trinity Health v. North Central Emergency Services
Trinity Health, Plaintiff and Appellee
North Central Emergency
Services, P.C., Defendant and Appellant
North Central Judicial District,
Judge Gary A. Holum
|Nature of Action:||Contracts|
|Term:||02/2003  Argument: 02/11/2003|
|ND cite:||2003 ND 86|
662 N.W.2d 280
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
I. Did the trial court err in granting, sua sponte, summary judgment in favor of Trinity?
II. Did the trial court err in dismissing, sua sponte, NCES's claims and defenses?
III. Did the trial court err in denying NCES's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment?
IV. Did the trial court err in denying NCES's Motion In Limine Regarding Mitigation of Damages?
V. Did the trial court err in denying NCES's Motion to Compel Discovery, NCES's Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoenas, and in granting Trinity's Motion for Protective Order?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Whether the trial court properly denied NCES's motion for partial summary judgment given that Trinity had not terminated the Agreement.
2. Whether the trial court properly dismissed NCES's counterclaims and granted summary judgment in favor of Trinity, and whether NCES had sufficient notice given that the converse of its motion would inevitably mean that Trinity would prevail.
3. Whether the trial court properly dismissed NCES's estoppel claims and defenses given that a written contract controlled the relationship and given admissions by NCES that preclude proof of the elements of promissory estoppel.
4. Whether the trial court properly applied the law of mitigation when it denied NCES's motion in limine.
5. Whether the trial court abused its discretion when it denied NCES's motion to compel related to discovery of documents and depositions of doctors who were not parties to the contract between NCES and Trinity, who were not employees of NCES, and who were not involved in any contract negotiations between NCES and Trinity.
|Add Docket 20020317 RSS|
|1||11/14/2002 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 11/12/2002|
|2||11/14/2002 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 11/12/2002|
|3||11/21/2002 Affidavit of James B. Lynch (appearance in S.C. is authorized under 11(e), N.D.R.Ct.|
|4||11/21/2002 TRANSCRIPT DATED 10-2-01, 12-3-01, 2-4-02, & 9-17-02|
|5||11/22/2002 DISK - TRA (10/2/01, 12/3/01, 2/4/02, & 9-17-02)|
|6||12/03/2002 APPELLANT BRIEF|
|7||12/03/2002 APPELLANT APPENDIX|
|8||12/03/2002 DISK - ATB|
|9||12/13/2002 RECORD ON APPEAL (4 volumes & 6 depositions)|
|10||01/06/2003 APPELLEE BRIEF|
|11||01/06/2003 APPELLEE APPENDIX|
|12||01/07/2003 DISK - AEB|
|13||01/20/2003 REPLY BRIEF|
|14||01/20/2003 SUPPLEMENTAL APPENDIX OF APPELLANT|
|15||01/20/2003 DISK - RYB|
|16||02/11/2003 APPEARANCES: Randall J. Bakke, Dr. Michael Boulter; James B. Lynch, David J. Hogue, Todd Grages|
|17||02/11/2003 ARGUED: Bakke; Lynch (Vol. Y; Page 85)|
|18||02/11/2003 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|19||06/03/2003 DISPOSITION (and Remanded): AFFIRMED/PT, REVERSED/PT|
|20||06/03/2003 UNANIMOUS OPINION: VandeWalle, Gerald W.|
|21||06/03/2003 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellant|
|22||06/04/2003 Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|24||07/08/2003 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|25||09/08/2008 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|