Lawrence E. Jahnke

Riemers v. State of North Dakota , 2008 ND 101, 750 N.W.2d 407
When the Supreme Court denies a petition to review a Court of Appeals decision, the decision becomes final and will not be differently determined on a subsequent appeal in the same case.
A trial court is considered an expert in determining the amount of attorney fees, and its decision concerning the amount and reasonableness of the attorney's fees will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.
Paralegal costs may be included in reasonable attorney's fees.
Manske v. Workforce Safety and Insurance , 2008 ND 79, 748 N.W.2d 394
A worker's employment need not be the sole cause of injury to be compensable. It is sufficient if a work condition is a substantial contributing factor to the disease.
The fact that an employee may have physical conditions or personal habits which make him or her more prone to such an injury does not constitute a sufficient reason for denying a claim.
Interest of B.B. , 2008 ND 51, 746 N.W.2d 411
A child is deprived if clear and convincing evidence shows the child is without the proper parental care necessary for the child's physical, mental, or emotional health, or morals, and the deprivation is not due primarily to the lack of financial means of the child's parents or guardians.
Reasonable efforts to preserve and reunite families must be made before the placement of a child in foster care, to prevent or eliminate the need for removing the child from the child's home, and to make it possible for a child to return safely to the child's home.
Manitoba Public Ins. Corp. v. Dakota Fire Ins. Co. , 2007 ND 206, 743 N.W.2d 788
A procedural remedy is not a vested right and is subject to repeal, modification, or change.
Matter of Midgett , 2007 ND 198, 742 N.W.2d 803
The Sixth Amendment does not apply to a civil commitment proceeding for a sexually dangerous individual.
In a civil commitment proceeding for a sexually dangerous individual, evidence of prior sexually predatory conduct or criminal conduct, including a record of the juvenile court, is admissible.
Interest of B.B. , 2007 ND 115, 735 N.W.2d 855
To satisfy the business records exception to the hearsay rule, each participant in the creation of the record must be acting in the course of regularly conducted business.
The Sixth Amendment right to confront and cross-examine witnesses does not apply to civil proceedings.
A party in a deprivation proceeding in juvenile court is entitled to the opportunity to cross-examine adverse witnesses.
A juvenile court's finding of deprivation will not be set aside on appeal unless clearly erroneous.
Rydell GM Auto Center v. Johnson , 2007 ND 75, 734 N.W.2d 342
An order denying a party's request to vacate default judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).
Riemers v. State of North Dakota , 2007 ND App 1, 731 N.W.2d 620
Summary judgment is appropriate if the information available to the trial court does not establish a genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
An appeal is frivolous if it is flagrantly groundless, devoid of merit, or demonstrates persistence in the course of litigation which could be seen as evidence of bad faith.
Lucier v. Lucier , 2007 ND 3, 725 N.W.2d 899
A spousal support obligation may be modified if the district court finds there is a material change in circumstances after examining the reasons for the changes in income and the extent to which the changes were contemplated.
A contemplated change in circumstances is not a change that justifies modifying spousal support.
When modifying a spousal support award, the district court must adequately explain its rationale in determining the new support amount.
State v. Oliver , 2006 ND 241, 724 N.W.2d 114
A faded temporary registration certificate with no visible printing is indicative of a temporary certificate that is more than thirty days old and provides an objective fact giving an officer a right to stop a vehicle to check its validity.
State v. Ruud , 2006 ND 94, 719 N.W.2d 384
Conviction for theft of property is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).
State v. Feist , 2006 ND 52, 711 N.W.2d 606
A district court order denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7).
State v. Seglen , 2005 ND 124, 700 N.W.2d 702
The Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures applies only to government action and not to private parties.
Consent is a recognized exception to the warrant requirement, and the State has the burden of proving consent.
A warrantless search of all patrons entering an arena when there is no history of violence or injury is not reasonable and violates the Fourth Amendment.
Wheeler v. Jahnke , 2005 ND 57, 694 N.W.2d 22
A district court order affirming a magistrate's finding of probable cause to bind a defendant over for trial on charges of gross sexual imposition and encouraging the deprivation of a minor is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1).
Gamboa v. State , 2005 ND 48, 693 N.W.2d 21
In post-conviction relief proceedings, it is not an abuse of discretion to deny default judgment when a petitioner cannot show he suffered any prejudice from the State's untimely response.
Post-conviction relief applications seeking withdrawal of a guilty plea must be made in a timely manner in accordance with Rule 32, N.D.R.Crim.P.
City of Grand Forks v. Scialdone , 2005 ND 24, 691 N.W.2d 198
Evidence about calibration checks when an Intoxilyzer has been moved is not a foundational requirement for showing an Intoxilyzer test was administered in accordance with the approved method for conducting the test or for admission of the test result into evidence.
If a defendant rebuts the prosecution's prima facie showing of fair administration of a blood-alcohol test for admission into evidence, the prosecution may present testimony to show fair administration despite defendant's rebuttal.
A judgment will not ordinarily be reversed on appeal for surprise when no request is made for a continuance at the time and there is no showing of inability to meet the situation.
Johnson v. State , 2004 ND 130, 681 N.W.2d 769
An application for post-conviction relief is properly dismissed on the pleadings if the court cannot discern a potential for proof to support the application.
A defendant who inexcusably fails to raise all his claims in a single post-conviction proceeding misuses the post-conviction process by initiating a subsequent application raising issues that could have been raised in the earlier proceeding.
The Strickland standard for assessing ineffective assistance of counsel applies to claims of ineffective post-conviction counsel.
A criminal defendant has no constitutional right to "hybrid" representation and to act as co-counsel with his attorney.
Zuger v. State , 2004 ND 16, 673 N.W.2d 615
Summary judgment is appropriate if the information available to the trial court does not establish a genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Summary judgment is appropriate against parties who fail to establish the existence of a factual dispute on an essential element of a claim on which they will bear the burden of proof at trial.
Factual assertions in a brief do not raise an issue of material fact satisfying N.D.R.Civ.P. 56(e).
The elements of an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress are extreme and outrageous conduct that is intentional or reckless and causes severe emotional distress.
Interest of D.P.O. , 2003 ND 127, 667 N.W.2d 590
Establishment of a psychological parent relationship does not end the trial court's inquiry in making a custody decision, but merely furnishes a justification for the award of custody to a party other than the natural parent.
When a psychological parent and a natural parent each seek a court-ordered award of custody, the natural parent's paramount right to custody prevails unless the court finds it in the child's best interests to award custody to the psychological parent to prevent serious harm or detriment to the child.
As a prerequisite to awarding grandparent visitation, the trial court must determine whether the visitation would be in the best interests of the child and whether the visitation would interfere with the parent-child relationship.
John T. Jones Construction Co. v. City of Grand Forks , 2003 ND 109, 665 N.W.2d 698
Parties to an arbitration agreement cannot contractually expand the scope of judicial review of an arbitration award beyond that provided by the Uniform Arbitration Act.
The Uniform Arbitration Act does not authorize Supreme Court review of an arbitration award that has not been subject to review in the district court.
Koehler v. County of Grand Forks , 2003 ND 44, 658 N.W.2d 741
A plaintiff alleging a failure-to-promote discrimination claim under the North Dakota Human Rights Act must show: (1) she was a member of a protected group; (2) she was qualified and applied for a promotion to an available position; (3) she was rejected; and (4) a similarly qualified employee who was not part of a protected group was promoted instead.
An ongoing personality conflict does not transform into an actionable disability claim merely because one party becomes disabled.
Downing v. ND Workers Comp. , 2003 ND 2, 660 N.W.2d 232
Judgment of the district court affirming a final order of the North Dakota Workers Compensation Bureau is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).
Kimball v. Landeis , 2002 ND 162, 652 N.W.2d 330
Summary judgment is not appropriate in a negligence action if the disputed facts and permissible inferences from those facts are such that reasonable persons could reach different conclusions from those facts and inferences.
Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 4(b)(2)(c), personal service upon an individual for whom a guardian has been appointed is accomplished by serving the individual's guardian.
Absent valid service of process, actual knowledge of a lawsuit is insufficient to effectuate personal jurisdiction over a defendant.
For equitable tolling of a statute of limitations, a plaintiff must have several legal remedies and reasonably and in good faith pursue one of the remedies, thereby tolling the limitation for the other remedies.
Interest of R.O. , 2002 ND 154, 652 N.W.2d 327
Less than 24 hours notice before an involuntary commitment hearing is inadequate notice to permit preparation for the hearing.
Estate of Howser , 2002 ND 33, 639 N.W.2d 485
Whether undue influence exists is a question of fact.
A trial court may remove the personal representative of an estate for cause.
Gleich v. Gleich , 2001 ND 185, 636 N.W.2d 418
A child support obligor is entitled to an adjustment of a child support obligation for extended visitation if the visitation ordered by the trial court exceeds sixty out of ninety consecutive nights.
State v. Miller , 2001 ND 132, 631 N.W.2d 587
A trial court does not abuse its discretion or violate the defendant's right to present a defense when it excludes hearsay evidence about a dream the child-victim had about another male relative.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion when it excludes evidence which would have been merely cumulative of abundant other evidence establishing a fact.
As long as the defendant and witness are present in the courtroom and their view of each other is not physically obstructed, the Confrontation Clause is not violated by allowing the witness to testify while facing away from the defendant.
Flattum-Riemers v. Peters-Riemers , 2001 ND 121, 630 N.W.2d 71
A request for district court review of a judicial referee's findings and order need not specifically recite every issue raised before the referee to preserve those issues for appellate review.
A trial court may allow the filing of affidavits and documents less than 24 hours before a hearing.
Denial of a continuance because of the absence of a material witness is proper when the moving party does not show what the witness would testify to if present, or that the facts desired cannot be proven by other available witnesses, and when there is no showing of diligence to secure the testimony of the witness by deposition or personal appearance at trial.
Englund v. State , 2001 ND 2, 625 N.W.2d 264
Appeal from denial of post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).
Interest of N.C.C. , 2000 ND 129, 612 N.W.2d 561
To change custody after the two-year period following a custody order, the district court must determine a material change in the circumstances of the child or the parties has occurred since the custody order and modification is necessary to serve the child's best interests.
A district court's findings on a motion to change custody will not be reversed unless they are clearly erroneous.
Goff v. Goff , 2000 ND 57, 607 N.W.2d 573
When a guardian ad litem files an investigative report with the district court, the parties must have a opportunity to call and cross-examine the guardian ad litem.
Goff v. Goff , 1999 ND 95, 593 N.W.2d 768
Under the first Stout factor, a trial court's relocation decision must give due weight to the possibility a proposed move will enhance both the economic and noneconomic aspects of the custodial family unit.
A restructured visitation schedule after a move need not provide an equal amount of visitation time.
Botnen v. Lukens , 1998 ND 224, 587 N.W.2d 141
Whenever specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue, expert testimony is admissible.
An award of custody of a child to grandparents, rather than to one or both of the child's natural parents, is clearly erroneous unless exceptional circumstances require such a custody disposition in the best interests of the child.
An alternating custody arrangement requires a factual finding it is in the child's best interest.
State v. Vondal , 1998 ND 188, 585 N.W.2d 129
Failure to receive a copy of conditions of probation reimposed upon a Rule 35, N.D.R.Crim.P., reduction of sentence will not invalidate a subsequent revocation of probation for violations of certain conditions if the defendant had prior actual and clear notice of the conditions.
The State v. Lewis doctrine regarding court-appointed counsel is still the proper procedure in North Dakota when counsel believes an appeal to be without merit.
Interest of McIlwain , 562 N.W.2d 104 (N.D. 1996)
Summarily affirmed under Rule 35.1, N.D.R.App.P.
Mertes v. Walberg , 548 N.W.2d 378 (N.D. 1996)
Burgener v. Bushaw , 545 N.W.2d 163 (N.D. 1996)
Fontes v. Dixon , 544 N.W.2d 869 (N.D. 1996)
Walter K. Knoop v. Cynthia K. Knoop , 542 N.W.2d 114 (N.D. 1996)
State v. Lamb , 541 N.W.2d 457 (N.D. 1996)
Allstate Insurance Co. v. Nodak Mutual Insurance Co. , 540 N.W.2d 614 (N.D. 1995)
Iverson, Byzewski v. Iverson , 535 N.W.2d 739 (N.D. 1995)
Reinecke v. Griffeth , 533 N.W.2d 695 (N.D. 1995)
Kemp v. City of Grand Forks , 523 N.W.2d 406 (N.D. 1994)
Smith v. City of Grand Forks , 525 N.W.2d 251 (N.D. 1994)
Berg v. Lien , 522 N.W.2d 455 (N.D. 1994)
Bye v. Mack , 519 N.W.2d 302 (N.D. 1994)
Bosch v. Moore , 517 N.W.2d 412 (N.D. 1994)
The United Hospital v. D'Annunzio v. Grand Forks Co. , 514 N.W.2d 681 (N.D. 1994)
Thompson v. Danner , 507 N.W.2d 550 (N.D. 1993)
Skaro v. State , 503 N.W.2d 848 (N.D. 1993)
Interest of K.S. , 500 N.W.2d 603 (N.D. 1993)
State v. Bakke , 498 N.W.2d 819 (N.D. 1993)
Anderson v. J. D. , 494 N.W.2d 160 (N.D. 1992)
Schmidt v. Ramsey County , 488 N.W.2d 411 (N.D. 1992)
Olson v. University of North Dakota , 488 N.W.2d 386 (N.D. 1992)
Omlid v. Sweeney , 484 N.W.2d 486 (N.D. 1992)
Bykonen v. United Hospital , 479 N.W.2d 140 (N.D. 1992)
Ressler v. Humane Society of Grand Forks , 480 N.W.2d 429 (N.D. 1992)
State v. Skaro , 474 N.W.2d 711 (N.D. 1991)
State v. Taillon , 470 N.W.2d 226 (N.D. 1991)
Leadbetter v. Rose , 467 N.W.2d 431 (N.D. 1991)
Uran v. Uran , 468 N.W.2d 136 (N.D. 1991)
United Hospital v. D'Annunzio , 466 N.W.2d 595 (N.D. 1990)
United Hospital v. D'Annunzio , 462 N.W.2d 652 (N.D. 1990)
State of Washington ex rel. Breyfogle v. Breyfogle , 464 N.W.2d 205 (N.D. 1990)
State v. Dymowski , 459 N.W.2d 777 (N.D. 1990)
State v. Dymowski , 458 N.W.2d 490 (N.D. 1990)

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 08/29/2008