|Filed Dec. 16, 1986|
William Case, d/b/a Home Improvement and Maintenance, Plaintiff
Golden Cue Billiards, Inc., a North Dakota corporation, Defendant
Hamby Creek Enterprises, a partnership, and Harold Poulsen, Mavis Poulsen as the Personal Representatives of the Estate of Russell Poulsen, deceased, and Emery Matsko, as partners of Hamby Creek Enterprises, and individually, Defendants and Third Party Plaintiffs
Golden Cue Billiards, Inc., a North Dakota corporation, Ronald Erickson, Bixby Knight, and Asleson Company, Inc., Third Party Defendants
Civil No. 11318
Asleson Company, Inc., Plaintiff and Appellant
Hamby Creek Enterprises, a partnership, and Harold Poulsen, Mavis Poulsen as Personal Represetatives of the Estate of Russell Poulsen, deceased, and Emery Matsko, as partners of Hamby Creek Enterprises, and individually, Defendants and Appellees
Civil No. 11319
Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable Jon R. Kerian, Judge.
Opinion of the Court by Erickstad, Chief Justice.
Thomas Law Firm, P.O. Box 2298, Minot, ND 58702, for appellant; argued by Robert S. Thomas.
Pringle & Herigstad, P.O. Box 1000, Minot, ND 58702, for appellees; argued by Donald A. Negaard.
Case v. Golden Cue Billiards, Inc. and Asleson Company, Inc. v. Hamby Creek Enterprises, et al.
Erickstad, Chief Justice.
Asleson Company, Inc. appeals from an order of the District Court of Ward County denying its motion for a new trial. We affirm the order under NDRAppP 35.1(a)(4).1
Ralph J. Erickstad, C.J.
Gerald W. VandeWalle
H.F. Gierke III
Beryl J. Levine
J. Philip Johnson
"RULE 35.1 SUMMARY DISPOSITION
"(a) Affirmance by Summary Opinion. In any case in which the court determines after argument, unless waived, that no reversible error of law appears and insofar as applicable:
(1) the appeal is frivolous and completely without merit;
(2) the judgment of the trial court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous;
(3) the verdict of the jury is supported by substantial evidence;
(4) the trial court did not abuse its discretion;
(5) the order of an administrative agency is supported by a preponderance of the evidence;
(6) the summary judgment, directed verdict, or Judgment on the pleadings is supported by the record; or,
(7) a previous controlling appellate decision is dispositive of the appeal, the court may affirm by an opinion citing this rule and indicating which one or. more of the above criteria applies and citing any previous controlling appellate decision. The opinion may be in the following form: 'Affirmed under NDRApp.P., 35.1(a)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), or M.'
"(b) Quarterly Publication. A list indicating the disposition of all decisions rendered by the supreme court under subdivision (a) must be submitted for quarterly publication in the North Western Reporter, except for those decisions the supreme court specially orders to be published in the regular manner."