Riemers v. Mahar
v.
Rick Mahar, Defendant and Appellee
Judge Michael G. Sturdevant
| Appellant: | Pro se | |
| Appellee: | Hodny Currie Lawyers |
I. Did the court err by accepting Mahar's motion for summary judgment even though it was defective and totally lacking in substance?
II. Did the court err in ruling that Riemers was a public figure and thus Riemers had to prove Mahar's statement s were made with malice?
III. Did the court err by ruling that it was important that Riemers had not presented any evidence establishing any facts in dispute?
IV. Did the court err by not following the correct standard for summary judgment in a defamation action?
V. Did the court err by making findings of fact in regards to the truthfulness of Mahar's statements?
VI. Did the court err by not following North Dakota statutes for defamation actions?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I.The summary judgment motion was not defective or lacking in substance.
II.The court did not err in finding that Riemers was a public figure.
III.The court did not err by finding it significant that Riemers had not presented evidence establishing facts that were in dispute.
IV.The court followed an appropriate standard for summary judgment in a defamation action.
V.The court did not err in making "Findings of fact" in regard to the truthfulness of the alleged libelous Statements.
VI.The court did not err by failing to follow North Dakota statutory requirements for a defamation action.
Add Docket 20070232 RSS