TO: Joint Procedure Committee
FROM: Mike Hagburg
DATE: January 13, 2016
RE: Rule 7.1, N.D.R.Ct., Judgments, Orders and Decrees
Bismarck attorney Thomas Jackson contacted staff about some issues he had with Rule 7.1. He was involved in a matter where the court prepared its own findings of fact and conclusions of law and ordered the opposing party to prepare a proposed judgment. The opposing party did so, filed it with the court, and the clerk signed off on it.
Mr. Jackson said he had problems with the proposed judgment and thought he had 14 days to file objections under the rule. He said he examined the rule closely, however, and discovered that proposed judgments were not covered by the rule's provision allowing a response to another's party's proposal. He said he will now need to follow a more formal procedure to attempt to get the judgment corrected.
Mr. Jackson suggested that the rule be amended to include proposed judgments with proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law as an item the non-preparing party may object to under the rule. Proposed amendments to Rule 7.1 consistent with Mr. Jackson's suggestion are attached. They begin at line 7 of the proposal.