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  2:45pm
ND cite: 2007 ND 137
NW cite: 737 N.W.2d 390

Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format

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 Add Docket 20070043 RSS

Docket entries:
102/08/2007 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 02/07/2007
202/08/2007 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 02/07/2007
302/26/2007 TRANSCRIPT DATED August 2, 2006
402/27/2007 DISK-tra(8/2/06) electronic
503/12/2007 RECORD ON APPEAL including Separate (Entry No. 5-VHS Tapes). Not rec'd Entry No. 14 (CR Tape).
604/06/2007 APPELLANT BRIEF
704/06/2007 Addendum (attached to ATB)
804/06/2007 APPELLANT APPENDIX
904/06/2007 Transcripts dated 2-9-06 & 3-9-06 (Administrative Hearings)
1004/09/2007 Affidavit of Service by Mail of ATB, ATA, & Transcripts
1104/09/2007 DISK - atb
1204/13/2007 Rec'd Copies of Order for Judgment dated 1-5-06 for ATA
1304/13/2007 DISK - TRAs dated 2-9-06 and 3-9-06
1405/08/2007 APPELLEE BRIEF
1505/08/2007 Addendum to Appellee's Brief
1605/08/2007 APPELLEE APPENDIX
1705/09/2007 DISK - AEB
1805/24/2007 REPLY BRIEF
1905/25/2007 DISK-RYB
2006/05/2007 APPEARANCES: Jonathan T. Garaas; Patricia A. Roscoe
2106/05/2007 ARGUED: Garaas; Roscoe
2206/05/2007 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
2307/25/2007 Letter dated July 25, 2007, from Jonathan Garaas with citation under NDRAppP 28(k): Greens at Half
2407/25/2007 Hollow, LLC v. Town of Huntington, 15 Misc.3d 415, 831 N.Y.S.2d 649 (2006 N.Y. Slip Op 26541)
2508/22/2007 DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED
2608/22/2007 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Crothers, Daniel John
2708/22/2007 Cost taxed in favor of Appellants
2808/23/2007 Judgment e-mailed to Parties
2909/13/2007 MANDATE
3009/17/2007 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 10/01/2014