Tarnavsky v. Rankin

20090085 Edward J. Tarnavsky, Plaintiff and Appellant
v.
Ron Rankin, Sheriff of McKenzie
County, personnally and in his
professional capacity, Defendant and Appellee

Appeal from: District Court, Northwest Judicial District, McKenzie County
Judge David W. Nelson
Nature of Action: Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Counsel:
Appellant: Pro se
Appellee: Scott Kenneth Porsborg
Appellee: David Ray Phillips
Term: 06/2009   Argument: 06/08/2009  9:30am
ND cite: 2009 ND 149
NW cite: 771 N.W.2d 578

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:
The standard of review for summary judgment is de novo, as all questions are questions of law. The standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence.
"In an appeal from summary judgment, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the party who opposed the motion and give that party the benefit of all favorable inferences which can be reasonably be drawn from the evidence. Bourgois v Montana Dakota Utilities, 466 NW 2 d 813-815 (ND 1991)" Lang v Barrios 472 NW 2 d 464 (ND 1991)

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Whether the District Court's Grant of Ron Rankin's Motion for Summary Judgment Was In Error.

Add Docket 20090085 RSS Add Docket 20090085 RSS

Docket entries:
103/06/2009 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 03/05/2009
204/07/2009 RECORD ON APPEAL
304/14/2009 APPELLANT BRIEF
404/14/2009 APPELLANT APPENDIX
504/16/2009 DISK - atb
604/22/2009 Copies of Notice of Appeal and update for TOC for ATA - inserted
705/14/2009 APPELLEE BRIEF
805/14/2009 APPELLEE APPENDIX
905/14/2009 E-FILED BRIEF - AEB
1005/14/2009 E-FILED APPENDIX - AEA
1105/14/2009 Received $25 surcharge for AEB (Receipt 18846)
1205/19/2009 Received 7 copies of AEB from CSD
1305/19/2009 Received 6 copies of AEA from CSD
1406/08/2009 APPEARANCES: Edward J. Tarnavsky, pro se/David R. Phillips and Scott K. Porsborg
1506/08/2009 ARGUED: Tarnavsky/Phillips
1606/08/2009 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
1707/02/2009 MOTION to Take Judicial Notice (e-filed)
1807/02/2009 E-FILED MOTION (Motion to Take Judicial Notice)
1907/17/2009 Response to Motion To Take Judicial Notice
2008/18/2009 NO ACTION TAKEN (Motion to Take Judicial Notice)
2108/18/2009 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
2208/18/2009 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Kapsner, Carol Ronning
2308/18/2009 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellee
2408/19/2009 Judgment E-Mailed to Parties
2509/01/2009 PETITION FOR REHEARING
2609/01/2009 DISK-PER
2709/16/2009 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Pet/Rehearing). Denied
2809/29/2009 MANDATE
2910/01/2009 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 07/28/2014