Novak v. Novak

880355 Jacque S. Novak, now known as
Jacque S. Olson, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Richard R. Novak, Defendant and Appellant

Appeal from: District Court, Northeast Central Judicial District, Grand Forks County
Judge Joel D. Medd
Nature of Action: Child Cust & Support (Div.\other)
Counsel:
Appellant: Pearson Christensen & Clapp, PLLP
Appellee: Olson, Juntunen & Sandberg, Ltd.
Term: 04/1989   Argument: 04/26/1989  
NW cite: 441 N.W.2d 656

Add Docket 880355 RSS Add Docket 880355 RSS

Docket entries:
112/01/1988 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 11/30/1988
212/14/1988 RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL & Ack. Tran. Order: 01/19/1989
301/06/1989 MOTION FOR STAY PENDING APPEAL, Brief in
401/06/1989 Support & Appendix to Brief in Support
501/10/1989 RECORD ON APPEAL and Exhibits
601/10/1989 TRANSCRIPT commencing October 13, 1988
701/11/1989 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (ON Mot /Stay). DENIED
801/16/1989 Apppellee's Brief in Opposition of Motion for Stay
901/16/1989 Pending Appeal & Affidavit of Jacque Olson (no further
1001/16/1989 action is contemplated since Court denied Motion for Stay)
1101/17/1989 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF 01-11-89 ACTION
1201/18/1989 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. DENIED
1301/18/1989 The Court voted to adhere to their previous action of 1-11-89
1402/20/1989 APPELLANT BRIEF with attached Addendum (Appendix?)
1502/23/1989 APPENDIX FILED w/MOTION FOR STAY WILL SERVE AS THE APPENDIX
1602/23/1989 FOR ARGUMENT ON THE MERITS (per Ron Fischer)
1703/17/1989 APPELLEE BRIEF
1803/29/1989 MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT OF ORAL ARGUMENT. RESPDUE: 04/03/1989
1903/30/1989 RESPONSE FILED (Use only after RSPDUE)
2003/31/1989 REPLY BRIEF with attached Addendum
2104/05/1989 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (mot/postpone o.a.). DENIED
2204/10/1989 Letter dated April 7 from P. Fisher stating his intention
2304/10/1989 to file a motion to postpone argument pursuant to Rule 6.1
2404/10/1989 of the ND Rules of Civil Procedure
2504/14/1989 Letter dated April 12 from D. Christensen resisting any
2604/14/1989 motion made pursuant to Rule 6.1
2704/20/1989 MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE PURSUANT TO RULE 6.1
2804/20/1989 ND Rules of Civil Procedure
2904/19/1989 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT. DENIED
3004/19/1989 The Court denied the motion prior to receiving it
3104/26/1989 APPEARANCES: Douglas A. Christensen; Patrick W. Fisher
3204/26/1989 ARGUED: Christensen; Fisher (Vol. R. pg.
3306/06/1989 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
3406/06/1989 SPLIT OPINION: Meschke, Herbert L.
3506/06/1989 CONCURRING SPECIALLY: VandeWalle, Gerald: CONCUR
3606/06/1989 COSTS ON APPEAL TAXED IN FAVOR OF APPELLEE
3707/11/1989 MANDATE
3804/12/2001 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 10/20/2014