City of Belfield v. Kilkenny

20060176 City of Belfield, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Frederick Eugene Kilkenny, Defendant and Appellant

Appeal from: District Court, Southwest Judicial District, Stark County
Judge Ronald L. Hilden
Nature of Action: Violation of City Ordinance
Counsel:
Appellant: Noel Robert Pesall
Appellee: Keogh Law Office , City Attorney
Term: 11/2006   Argument: 11/15/2006  1:00pm
ND cite: 2007 ND 44
NW cite: 729 N.W.2d 120

Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Listen to recording of oral argument in RM format
using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download.

Issues: Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
I. Whether the Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of North Dakota because it creates a criminal offence too indefinite for an ordinary person to understand.
II. Whether the Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of North Dakota because it encourages arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement?
III. Whether the Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of the United States because it creates a criminal offence too indefinite for an ordinary person to understand.
IV. Whether the Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of the United States because it encourages arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement?

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Whether the City of Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of North Dakota because it creates a criminal offence too indefinite for an ordinary person to understand.
II. Whether the City of Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of North Dakota because it encourages arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement?
III. Whether the City of Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of the United States because it creates a criminal offence too indefinite for an ordinary person to understand.
IV. Whether the City of Belfield, North Dakota "Barking Dog" ordinance is unconstitutionally vague under the Constitution of the United States because it encourages arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement?

Add Docket 20060176 RSS Add Docket 20060176 RSS

Docket entries:
106/14/2006 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 06/09/2006
206/14/2006 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 06/14/2006
306/21/2006 TRANSCRIPT DATED May 17, 2006
406/21/2006 DISK of tra dtd 5-17-06 (e-mailed)
507/07/2006 RECORD ON APPEAL & CORRESPONDENCE (SEPARATE)
607/10/2006 Certificate of Service of Record on Appeal on Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem
707/28/2006 APPELLANT BRIEF (e-filed pdf)
807/28/2006 E-FILED BRIEF - ATB
907/28/2006 APPELLANT APPENDIX (e-filed)
1007/28/2006 E-FILED APPENDIX (ATA)
1107/31/2006 Rec'd $25.00 surcharge for ATB
1207/31/2006 7 cc made of ATB
1307/31/2006 6 cc made of ATA
1408/09/2006 Substitution of Counsel, Robert Keogh is substitute for AE in place of Mary Nordsven
1508/11/2006 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF & Affidavit in Support
1608/11/2006 ACTION BY Chief Deputy CLERK. Granted: 09/26/2006
1709/26/2006 APPELLEE BRIEF
1809/26/2006 E-FILED BRIEF (AEB)
1909/28/2006 Received $25 Surcharge for AEB (Receipt #17124)
2009/28/2006 Copies (7) of AEB made
2111/15/2006 APPEARANCES: N. Robert Pesall; Robert A. Keogh
2211/15/2006 ARGUED: Pesall; Keogh
2311/15/2006 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
2403/22/2007 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
2503/22/2007 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Sandstrom, Dale V.
2603/23/2007 Judgment Mailed to Parties
2704/19/2007 MANDATE
2804/23/2007 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 07/30/2014