Sauby v. City of Fargo
, 2008 ND 60,
747 N.W.2d 65
A home rule city may not impose fees for noncriminal traffic offenses that exceed the limits set forth for equivalent violations under state law.
General language in judicial opinions must be read in the context of the issues before a court.
A court will not follow opinions of the Attorney General if they are inconsistent with the statutory interpretation that the court deems reasonable.
Strand v. U.S. Bank National Association ND
, 2005 ND 68,
693 N.W.2d 918
A party alleging that a contractual provision is unconscionable must demonstrate some quantum of both procedural and substantive unconscionability, and courts are to balance the various factors, viewed in totality, to determine whether the
contractual provision is so one-sided as to be unconscionable.
Procedural unconscionability is established when one party is in such a superior bargaining position that it totally dictates all terms of the contract, a preprinted standard form contract is used, there is no possible negotiation of terms, and the
only option presented to the other party is to "take it or leave it."
The right to bring a class action is procedural, and a class action is not a substantive remedy.
Contractual provisions which limit or exclude remedies otherwise available at law and leave a party without an effective remedy are substantively unconscionable.
Trade 'N Post, L.L.C. v. World Duty Free Americas, Inc
, 2001 ND 116,
628 N.W.2d 707
In determining whether there is an implied private right of action under a state statute, the Court should consider whether the plaintiff is one of the class for whose especial benefit the statute was enacted, whether there is any indication of
legislative intent to create such a remedy, and whether it is consistent with the underlying purposes of the legislative scheme to imply such a remedy.
The party urging an implied right of action bears the burden of proof to establish the legislature intended to create the remedy.
There is no implied private right of action for damages under the Unfair Discrimination Law, N.D.C.C. ch. 51-09, or the Unfair Trade Practices Law, N.D.C.C. ch. 51-10.
A common law tort claim for unlawful interference with business is recognized in this state.
The elements of a claim for unlawful interference with business are: (1) the existence of a valid business relationship or expectancy; (2) knowledge by the interferer of the relationship or expectancy; (3) an intentional and wrongful act of
interference; (4) proof that the interference caused the harm sustained; and (5) actual damages to the plaintiff.
In order to recover for unlawful interference with business, the plaintiff must prove that the interfering conduct was independently tortious or in violation of statute.
Jorgenson v. Agway, Inc.
, 2001 ND 104,
627 N.W.2d 391
North Dakota's Consumer Fraud Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 51-15, applies to a farmer who purchases confection sunflower seed for use in cultivating a sunflower crop for subsequent sale and who alleges the seed is defective and marketed in violation of the Act.
Dickie v. Farmers Union Oil Co.
, 2000 ND 111,
611 N.W.2d 168
Section 28-01.3-08, N.D.C.C., the North Dakota Products Liability Act statute of repose, creates an unconstitutional classification in violation of the equal protection rights provided under N.D. Const. art. 1, sec. 21.
Anderson v. Anderson
, 1999 ND 57,
591 N.W.2d 138
N.D.C.C. 39-06-09 imputes the negligence of a minor permit driver to an injured passenger when that passenger is the parent who signed the minor driver's permit application.
Bouchard v. Johnson
,
555 N.W.2d 81 (N.D. 1996)
The North Dakota Skiing Responsibility Act, Ch. 53-09,
N.D.C.C., does not provide an exclusive list of duties for
operators of skiing facilities and does not violate the special
laws or open courts provisions of the North Dakota Constitution
or its equal protection or due process clauses.
Braaten v. Deere & Co.
,
547 N.W.2d 751 (N.D. 1996)
In Re Craig
,
545 N.W.2d 764 (N.D. 1996)
RLI Insurance Co. v. Heling
,
520 N.W.2d 849 (N.D. 1994)
Born v. Mayers
,
514 N.W.2d 687 (N.D. 1994)
Champagne v. United States of America
,
513 N.W.2d 75 (N.D. 1994)
BASF Corporation v. Symington
,
512 N.W.2d 692 (N.D. 1994)
Cooperative Power Assoc. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
,
493 N.W.2d 661 (N.D. 1992)
Target Stores v. Automated Maintenance Services, Inc.
,
492 N.W.2d 899 (N.D. 1992)
Hebron Public School District v. United States Gypsum Company
,
474 N.W.2d 120 (N.D. 1991)
Butz v. World Wide, Inc.
,
472 N.W.2d 757 (N.D. 1991)
McKenzie County v. Hodel
,
467 N.W.2d 701 (N.D. 1991)
Gelinske v. Farmers Grain & Trading Co.
,
446 N.W.2d 261 (N.D. 1989)
Bellemare v. Gateway Builders, Inc.
,
399 N.W.2d 308 (N.D. 1987)
Trinity Medical Center v. ND Board of Nursing
,
399 N.W.2d 835 (N.D. 1987)
Keyes v. Amundson
,
359 N.W.2d 857 (N.D. 1984)
White Motor Credit Corporation v. Anderson
,
334 N.W.2d 208 (N.D. 1983)
Hulne v. International Harvester Co.
,
322 N.W.2d 474 (N.D. 1982)
Bartels v. City of Williston
,
276 N.W.2d 113 (N.D. 1979)
Merchant v. Richland County Water Management District
,
270 N.W.2d 801 (N.D. 1978)
C.L.W., a child v. M.J.
,
254 N.W.2d 446 (N.D. 1977)
City of Grafton v. Four G's, Inc.
,
252 N.W.2d 879 (N.D. 1977)
Dornacker v. Olson
,
248 N.W.2d 844 (N.D. 1976)
Hastings v. James River Aerie No. 2337
,
246 N.W.2d 747 (N.D. 1976)
First American Bank and Trust Co. v. Pfleger
,
243 N.W.2d 165 (N.D. 1976)
Nelson v. Dubois
,
232 N.W.2d 54 (N.D. 1975)
Vantine Paint and Glass Co. v. Kudrna
,
186 N.W.2d 127 (N.D. 1971)
Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Machine & Supply Co.
,
175 N.W.2d 656 (N.D. 1970)
Tri-State Ins. Co. v. Lubbock Machine & Supply Co.
,
175 N.W.2d 658 (N.D. 1970)
Sylling v. Agsco Distributors, Inc.
,
171 N.W.2d 825 (N.D. 1969)
Baeth v. Hoisveen
,
157 N.W.2d 728 (N.D. 1968)
State ex rel. Schirado v. Frye
,
157 N.W.2d 830 (N.D. 1968)
In re Garrison Diversion Conservancy District
,
144 N.W.2d 82 (N.D. 1966)
City of Grand Forks v. Grand Forks County
,
139 N.W.2d 242 (N.D. 1965)