Seibold v. Leverington
State of North Dakota, County
of Cass, ex. rel, Maria Janelle
Seibold, and KCS, a minor child, Plaintiffs
Maria Janelle Seibold, Appellant
Paul Ronald Leverington, Defendant and Appellee
East Central Judicial District,
Judge Douglas R. Herman
|Nature of Action:||Child Cust & Support (Div.\other)|
|Term:||10/2011  Argument: 10/19/2011 9:30am|
|ND cite:||2012 ND 25|
812 N.W.2d 460
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
I.Whether the trial court erred in denying Maria an evidentiary hearing on her motion for contempt.
II.Whether the trial court erred in denying Maria an evidentiary hearing on her motion for a second amended judgment.
III.Whether the trial court erred in finding no significant change of circumstances had occurred in the absence of an evidentiary hearing.
REPLY BRIEF ISSUES
1. Whether Maria was required to obtain a hearing and failed to do so as required by rule 3.2.
2. Whether Maria failed to submit a transcript or a stipulation to appeal without submission of a transcript in her appeal.
3. Does Maria's requests, if granted through her motions, modify residential responsibility?
4. Should Maria's contempt motion only be based on Paul prohibiting Maria with parenting time?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
Did the trial court commit reversible error in denying Maria's motions without conducting an evidentiary hearing on the same?
|Add Docket 20110152 RSS|
|1||05/19/2011||NOTICE OF APPEAL: 05/19/2011|
|2||06/22/2011||ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL (entry nos. 1 - 120)|
|3||06/30/2011||Received e-filing surcharge for ATB & ATA (Receipt #20388)|
|4||06/28/2011||APPELLANT BRIEF (e-filed)|
|5||06/28/2011||E-FILED BRIEF (ATB)|
|6||06/28/2011||APPELLANT APPENDIX (e-filed)|
|7||06/28/2011||E-FILED APPENDIX (ATA)|
|8||06/30/2011||Received e-filing surcharge for ATB & ATA (Receipt #20388).|
|9||07/05/2011||Received corrections to brief.|
|10||07/06/2011||Received corrections to ATA.|
|11||07/08/2011||Received 7 copies of ATB from Central Duplicating.|
|12||07/08/2011||Received 6 copies of ATA from Central Duplicating.|
|13||07/28/2011||APPELLEE BRIEF (e-filed)|
|14||07/28/2011||E-FILED BRIEF (AEB)|
|15||07/28/2011||APPELLEE APPENDIX (e-filed) PDF|
|16||07/28/2011||E-FILED APPENDIX (AEA) PDF|
|17||08/04/2011||Received corrections to AEB.|
|18||08/05/2011||Received $25 e-filing surcharge for AEB (Receipt #20598).|
|19||08/08/2011||Received 7 copies of AEB from Central Duplicating.|
|20||08/08/2011||Received 6 copies of AEA from Central Duplicating.|
|21||08/11/2011||REPLY BRIEF (e-filed)|
|22||08/11/2011||E-FILED BRIEF (ryb)|
|23||08/15/2011||Received 7 copies of RYB from Central Duplicating.|
|24||09/02/2011||NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|25||10/19/2011||APPEARANCES: Julie A. Oster & Appellant; Donavin L. Grenz|
|27||10/19/2011||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|28||02/17/2012||DISPOSITION: REVERSED AND REMANDED|
|29||02/17/2012||SPLIT OPINION: Maring, Mary Muehlen|
|30||02/17/2012||DISSENT: Sandstrom, Dale V.: DISSENT|
|31||02/17/2012||Costs on appeal taxed in favor of the appellant.|
|32||02/22/2012||Judgment Sent to Parties|