New Opinions: August 28 Wednesday, August 28, 2024

Wollan v. Innovis Health
Docket No.: 20240094
Filing Date: 8/28/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A jury's special verdict will be reversed only if it is perverse and clearly contrary to the evidence. The presumption on appeal is that jurors do not intend to return conflicting answers.

Reconciliation of a verdict includes an examination of both the law of the case and the evidence to determine whether the verdict is logical and probable and thus consistent, or whether it is perverse and clearly contrary to the evidence.

Rule 408, N.D.R.Ev., encourages candor during settlement discussions by expanding the common-law rule and rendering inadmissible evidence of conduct or a statement made during compromise negotiations.

Ebel, et al. v. Engelhart, et al.
Docket No.: 20240065
Filing Date: 8/28/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A contract requires an offer, an acceptance of an offer, and a mutual acceptance and understanding between the offeror and the offeree as to the terms of the obligation.

When an issue not raised by the pleadings is tried by the parties' express or implied consent, it must be treated in all respects as if raised in the pleadings.

Actual notice of a prior competing interest defeats a good-faith purchaser claim.

To succeed on a claim for intentional interference with contract, a plaintiff must prove (1) a contract existed, (2) the contract was breached, (3) the defendant instigated the breach, and (4) the defendant instigated the breach without justification. The test for proving justification is what is reasonable conduct under all the circumstances of the case. Even where the evidence shows a defendant interfered with a contract, the defendant's actions are justified if they are done for legitimate business concerns and did not maliciously seek to damage the plaintiff.

Gaddie v. State
Docket No.: 20240052
Filing Date: 8/28/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: To establish prosecutorial misconduct, an applicant for postconviction relief must show (1) the prosecutor's actions constitute misconduct, and (2) the misconduct had a prejudicial effect.

North Dakota Rule of Evidence 404(b) requires exclusion of evidence of other acts and crimes committed by the defendant when they are independent of the charged crime and do not fit into the rule's exceptions. Rule 404(b) requires prosecutors to give written notice and explanation if they intend to offer prior bad act evidence.

Knowing introduction of prior bad act evidence coupled with a failure to comply with the Rule 404(b) notice requirement constitutes prosecutorial misconduct.

Admission of evidence of prior sexual misconduct during a criminal prosecution for a sex-related crime creates unique potential for prejudice.