Gietzen v. Gabel
Christopher Gietzen, Plaintiff and Appellant
Jessica Gabel, n/k/a
Jessica Bay, Defendant and Appellee
East Central Judicial District,
Judge John Charles Irby
|Nature of Action:||Child Cust & Support (Div.\other)|
|Term:||03/2006  Argument: 03/20/2006 10:45am|
|ND cite:||2006 ND 153|
718 N.W.2d 552
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
1. Whether a portion of finding of fact 6, specifically the last two sentences, is supported by the evidence.
2. Whether finding of fact 12 is supported by the evidence.
3. Whether finding of fact 13 is supported by the evidence.
4. Whether finding of fact 14 is supported by the evidence.
5. Whether finding of fact 16 is supported by the evidence.
6. Whether finding of fact 19, specifically that portion that makes findings as to ndcc 14-09-06.2 factors b, c, e, f, h, J and k is supported by the evidence.
7. Whether finding of fact 20, which found that it was in justice's best interest that his physical custody be awarded to jessica and that the parties have joint legal custody, is supported by the evidence.
8. Whether conclusion of law 6, which orders that Jessica will have the sole physical custody of justice, is supported by the findings of fact.
9. Whether the court erred as a matter of law in not considering the evidence of domestic violence as required by 14-09-06.2 (1) (j), NDCC.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
Is the Trial Court's Award of Custody to Jessica Supported by the Facts and the Law?
A. Standard of Review
B. Is Finding of Fact #6 clearly erroneous?
C. Is Finding of Fact #12 clearly erroneous?
D. Is Finding of Fact #13 clearly erroneous?
E. Is Finding of Fact #14 clearly erroneous?
F. Is Finding of Fact #16 clearly erroneous?
G. Is Finding of Fact #19 clearly erroneous?
1. Is The trial court's finding in reference to factor b clearly erroneous?
2. Is the trial court's conclusion in reference to factor c clearly erroneous?
3. Is the trial court's finding in reference to factor e clearly erroneous?
4. Is the trial court's finding in reference to factor f clearly erroneous?
5. Is the trial court's finding in reference to factor h clearly erroneous?
6. Is the trial court's finding in reference to factor j clearly erroneous?
7. Is the trial court's finding in reference to factor k clearly erroneous?
H. Is Finding of Fact #20 clearly erroneous?
I. Is Conclusion of Law #6 supported by the Findings of Fact?
J. Did the trial court address the issue concerning evidence of domestic violence?
|Add Docket 20050268 RSS|
|1||08/09/2005||NOTICE OF APPEAL: 08/08/2005|
|2||08/17/2005||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 08/15/2005|
|3||08/29/2005||Notice from Roger Mjones of suspension of preparation of transcript for failure to pay|
|4||08/29/2005||Suspension of preparation of transcript|
|5||09/01/2005||Copy of ltr to Mr. Mjones from Mr. Keogh RE: payment for transcript|
|6||09/02/2005||E-mail from Mr. Mjones RE: receipt of payment for transcript|
|7||09/06/2005||Copy of letter to Sandie Ehrmantraut regarding preparation of transcript|
|8||09/14/2005||Transcript dated 2-28-05|
|9||09/15/2005||DISK of tra dtd 2-28-05|
|10||09/23/2005||RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL (Sandie Ehrmantraut): 10/04/2005|
|11||10/03/2005||MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT (Sandra Ehrmantraut)|
|12||10/06/2005||ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 10/18/2005|
|13||10/13/2005||TRANSCRIPT COMMENCING JANUARY 25, 2005 (2 VOLUMES)|
|14||10/14/2005||DISK -- transcript commencing January 25, 2005|
|15||10/19/2005||RECORD ON APPEAL (2 vols.), Exhibits, & Transcripts (3) (Not Rec'd: 22&59--tapes and|
|16||10/19/2005||53,89,113, &114--steno notes)|
|17||11/17/2005||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (faxed)|
|18||11/17/2005||ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE. Granted: 12/30/2005|
|19||11/17/2005||E-FILED MOTION (mat)|
|22||12/29/2005||DISK - ATB (e-mailed)|
|24||01/26/2006||E-FILED BRIEF - AEB in .pdf|
|26||01/26/2006||E-FILED Appellee's APPENDIX|
|27||01/30/2006||Received $25 surcharge for AEB - receipt #16742|
|28||02/01/2006||Copies of AEB & AEA rec'd from Central Duplicating.|
|29||02/06/2006||MOT. EXT/TIME REPLY BRIEF|
|30||02/06/2006||E-FILED MOTION (emailed request)|
|31||02/07/2006||ACTION BY CLERK (MRY). Granted: 02/17/2006|
|32||02/17/2006||MOT. EXT/TIME REPLY BRIEF (e-mail from Bob Keogh)(E-MAILED)|
|33||02/17/2006||E-FILED MOTION (E-FILED Req/ext/ryb)|
|34||02/17/2006||ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 02/24/2006|
|36||02/21/2006||E-FILED BRIEF - RYB|
|37||02/28/2006||Copies of RYB made|
|38||03/20/2006||APPEARANCES: Robert A. Keogh; Robert J. Schultz|
|39||03/20/2006||ARGUED: Keogh; Schultz|
|40||03/20/2006||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|41||07/18/2006||DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED|
|42||07/18/2006||SPLIT OPINION: Kapsner, Carol Ronning|
|43||07/18/2006||(DISSENT): Maring, Mary Muehlen: DISSENT|
|44||07/18/2006||(CONCURRING SPECIALLY): VandeWalle, Gerald W.: CONCUR|
|45||07/18/2006||(JOIN CONCUR SPECIALLY): Crothers, Daniel John: JN/CON|
|46||07/18/2006||COSTS ON APPEAL TAXED IN FAVOR OF APPELLANT|
|47||07/19/2006||Order/Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|48||07/26/2006||Supplemental Clerk's Certificate - Entry Nos. 137 - 139|
|50||08/15/2006||RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|51||01/06/2016||EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|