City of Fargo v. Malme

20070043

City of Fargo, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Mitch Malme and Mitch
Malme Investments, L.L.C., a
North Dakota limited liability
company, Defendants and Appellants

Appeal from:

District Court, East Central Judicial District, Cass County
Judge Cynthia Rothe-Seeger

Nature of Action:

Administrative Proceeding

Counsel:

Appellant:		Garaas Law Firm
Appellee:		Patricia Ann Laney , Asst. City Attorney

Term:

06/2007 Argument: 06/05/2007 02:45pm

ND cite:

2007 ND 137

NW cite:

737 N.W.2d 390

Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,^© a free download.

Issues:

Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
1.Has the City of Fargo implemented a process that usurps the power of the judiciary, denies parties due process of law, and implements a bill of attainder?
2.Did Fargo's Administrative Enforcement Board have subject matter jurisdiction, or even personal jurisdiction over Mitch Malme Investments, L.L.C., a North Dakota limited liability company?
3.Is there factual or legal justification for the City of Fargo to impose a fine against either Mitch Malme or Mitch Malme Investments, L.L.C.?
4.Does the City of Fargo's methodology of enforcing its penalties, by special assessment of real property, violate N.D.C.C. 57-20-07, and due process of law?
5.Can Appellants be held responsible for the use of the property by the tenants?

REPLY BRIEF ISSUES
The Brief of Appellee ["Brief"] does not contain a separate statement identifying what the City of Fargo ["FARGO"] believes are the "Issues on Appeal." FARGO apparently agrees the five issues identified by Appellants Mitch Malme and Malme Investments, L.L.C., [hereafter, the "MALMES"] adequately identify the issues.

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. Did the district court properly conclude that the City of Fargo has authority to create an administrative enforcement and appeal process for enforcing ordinance violations?
II. Did the district court properly conclude that the board's decision was not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable and that the parties were afforded due process?
III. Did the district court properly conclude that the board's decision concerning the cited ordinance violations was supported by sufficient evidence?
IV. Did the district court properly conclude that the penalties associated with the City's administrative enforcement program are lawful?

Add Docket 20070043 RSS

Docket entries:

1	02/08/2007	NOTICE OF APPEAL: 02/07/2007
2	02/08/2007	ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 02/07/2007
3	02/26/2007	TRANSCRIPT DATED August 2, 2006
4	02/27/2007	DISK-tra(8/2/06) electronic
5	03/12/2007	RECORD ON APPEAL including Separate (Entry No. 5-VHS Tapes). Not rec'd Entry No. 14 (CR Tape).
6	04/06/2007	APPELLANT BRIEF
7	04/06/2007	Addendum (attached to ATB)
8	04/06/2007	APPELLANT APPENDIX
9	04/06/2007	Transcripts dated 2-9-06 & 3-9-06 (Administrative Hearings)
10	04/09/2007	Affidavit of Service by Mail of ATB, ATA, & Transcripts
11	04/09/2007	DISK - atb
12	04/13/2007	Rec'd Copies of Order for Judgment dated 1-5-06 for ATA
13	04/13/2007	DISK - TRAs dated 2-9-06 and 3-9-06
14	05/08/2007	APPELLEE BRIEF
15	05/08/2007	Addendum to Appellee's Brief
16	05/08/2007	APPELLEE APPENDIX
17	05/09/2007	DISK - AEB
18	05/24/2007	REPLY BRIEF
19	05/25/2007	DISK-RYB
20	06/05/2007	APPEARANCES: Jonathan T. Garaas; Patricia A. Roscoe
21	06/05/2007	ARGUED: Garaas; Roscoe
22	06/05/2007	ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
23	07/25/2007	Letter dated July 25, 2007, from Jonathan Garaas with citation under NDRAppP 28(k): Greens at Half
24	07/25/2007	Hollow, LLC v. Town of Huntington, 15 Misc.3d 415, 831 N.Y.S.2d 649 (2006 N.Y. Slip Op 26541)
25	08/22/2007	DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED
26	08/22/2007	UNANIMOUS OPINION: Crothers, Daniel John
27	08/22/2007	Cost taxed in favor of Appellants
28	08/23/2007	Judgment e-mailed to Parties
29	09/13/2007	MANDATE
30	09/17/2007	RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 12/01/2008