Search Tips


31 - 40 of 12291 results

Brossart, et al. v. Janke, et al. 2020 ND 98
Docket No.: 20190236
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Case Type: OTHER (Civil)
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald W.

Highlight: Under N.D.C.C. § 28-20.1-03(2), the clerk of district court is required to mail notice of the filing of a foreign judgment to the judgment debtor.
Under N.D.C.C. § 28-20.1-03(3), a judgment creditor may not execute on a foreign judgment without first adequately complying with the notice procedures provided in N.D.C.C. § 28-20.1-03(2).
Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 33(a)(3), a judgment creditor is allowed to serve interrogatories on each judgment debtor who is jointly or severally liable for the judgment.
Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 33(a)(3), subparts to the primary question are not separate interrogatories.
Upon a finding that a claim for relief was frivolous, the district court must award reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party.

State v. Kolstad 2020 ND 97
Docket No.: 20190228
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Case Type: DUI/DUS
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald W.

Highlight: The State may appeal from an order quashing an information or indictment.
The loss of evidence in the State’s custody may amount to a due process violation when (1) the State fails to collect evidence in the first instance; (2) the State fails to preserve evidence once it has been collected; and (3) the State suppresses evidence which has been collected and preserved.
When apprised of a discovery violation, the district court should impose the least severe sanction to rectify the prejudice.
Dismissal of an action for discovery violations is one of the most severe sanctions available to a court. Dismissal should be used sparingly and only in extreme situations and should not be used if an alternative, less drastic sanction is available and just as effective.

Rath v. Rath 2020 ND 96
Docket No.: 20190330
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Case Type: CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: District court orders denying a motion for contempt and a request to reconsider are affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1 (a)(1) and (4).

State v. Helmenstein 2020 ND 95
Docket No.: 20190336
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Amended criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Constitutional issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered.

State v. Darji 2020 ND 94
Docket No.: 20190303
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

C & K Consulting v. Ward County Board of Commissioners (consol w/ 20190313- 2020 ND 93
Docket No.: 20190312
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: The district court abused its discretion when it denied granting relief from a judgment dismissing a case as a sanction when the dismissal was based on a misapplication of the law.

Schwindt v. Sorel 2020 ND 92
Docket No.: 20190245
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Other factors may cause a horizontal gaze nystagmus test to be unreliable, including physiological causes for nystagmus, but those factors go to the weight of the evidence and not its admissibility.

Whether a driver refused to take a chemical test is a question of fact.

Kastet v. NDDOT 2020 ND 91
Docket No.: 20200003
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court judgment reversing an administrative law judge’s order suspending driving privileges is reversed and remanded.

WSI v. Avila, et al. 2020 ND 90
Docket No.: 20190386
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court judgment affirming an administrative law judge's order, which determined an individual is entitled to both the scheduled and whole body impairment award, is reversed and remanded under N.D.C.C. § 28-32-46, because it is not in accordance with the law.

Feltman, et al. v. Gaustad, et al. 2020 ND 89
Docket No.: 20190247
Filing Date: 5/7/2020
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Elements of a legal malpractice claim are: 1) the existence of an attorney-client relationship, 2) a duty by the attorney to the client, 3) a breach of that duty by the attorney, and 4) damages to the client proximately caused by the breach of duty.

On review of a summary judgment, evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, and that party is given the benefit of all favorable inferences reasonably be drawn from the evidence.

Page 4 of 1230