New opinions: Feb. 18 Thursday, February 18, 2021
The Supreme Court has issued 20 new opinions. The summaries are below.
To see an opinion, click on the "View Opinion" button. Opinions display in a printable format. Hyperlinks to all North Dakota opinions and rules cited in an opinion are included in the text: hover over the citation and click to follow the hyperlink.
See other Supreme Court opinions at: https://www.ndcourts.gov/supreme-court/opinions
|
WSI v. Cherokee Services Group, et al. 2021 ND 36 Highlight: Tribal sovereign immunity protects Indian tribes against lawsuits, even ones brought by the State. |
|
AE2S Construction v. Hellervik Oilfield Technologies, et al. 2021 ND 35 Highlight: An appearance for purposes of N.D.R.Civ.P. 55(a) is any response sufficient to give the plaintiff or his or her attorney notice of an intent to contest the claim. |
|
Atkins v. State 2021 ND 34 Highlight: If an applicant files a N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion for relief following an order denying post-conviction relief, the motion will be treated as another post-conviction relief application and will not toll the time for appealing the order denying post-conviction relief. |
|
Orwig v. Orwig 2021 ND 33 Highlight: In a court trial, any error in admitting a deposition is harmless unless the deposition testimony induced the court to make an essential finding which would not otherwise have been made or otherwise affected a party’s substantial rights. |
|
Paulson v. Paulson 2021 ND 32 Highlight: A district court’s decision on whether to vacate a divorce judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. A party seeking to vacate a divorce judgment entered pursuant to a settlement agreement under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) must demonstrate extraordinary circumstances justifying relief. When considering whether a divorce judgment based on a settlement agreement should be vacated, the district court should inquire: (1) whether the agreement is free from mistake, duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence; and (2) whether the agreement is unconscionable. The party seeking relief from judgment based on fraud has the burden to establish fraud by clear and convincing evidence. Unconscionability may be considered as a ground for relief under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6). To vacate a divorce judgment as unconscionable, there must be a showing of both procedural and substantive unconscionability. A disparate settlement is not necessarily substantively unconscionable, particularly in a short-term marriage |
|
Burr v. N.D. State Board of Dental Examiners 2021 ND 31 Highlight: The test we apply when determining governmental liability and discretionary acts distinguishes between immune discretionary acts and non-immune ministerial acts. In examining the nature of the challenged conduct, the first inquiry a court must consider is whether the action is a matter of choice for the acting employee. Even if ‘the challenged conduct involves an element of judgment or choice, the second inquiry a court must consider is whether that judgment or choice is of the kind that the discretionary function exception was designed to shield. |
|
Oden v. Minot Builders Supply, et al. 2021 ND 30 Highlight: Foreign judgments are not entitled to full faith and credit under certain circumstances such as when the rendering court lacks jurisdiction. |
|
Grand Prairie Agriculture v. Pelican Township Board of Supervisors 2021 ND 29 Highlight: A township’s decision on a petition for approval of a proposed site for an animal feeding operation may be reversed on appeal if the township misinterprets or misapplies the law. |
|
Whetsel v. State 2021 ND 28 Highlight: Once the State has responded to a petition for post-conviction relief, sua sponte summary disposition by the court is no longer available, and the State is required to move for summary disposition. |
|
Thompson-Widmer v. Larson, et al. 2021 ND 27 Highlight: A publication or communication must be false to be defamatory.
Fulfilling an open records request is a privileged communication and not subject to liability for defamation. |
|
McClintock v. NDDOT 2021 ND 26 Highlight: To facilitate compliance with statutory requirements and the foundational element requiring a test be fairly administered, the state toxicologist has established approved methods for administering chemical breath tests. |
|
State v. Spillum 2021 ND 25 Highlight: If a motion for judgment of acquittal was made at trial on specified grounds, and those grounds did not include the claim on appeal, the defendant does not preserve that issue for this Court’s review. |
|
Davis v. Davis, et al. 2021 ND 24 Highlight: Failure to provide a non-moving party the allotted time to respond under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a)(2) is a misapplication of law. |
|
Stoddard v. Singer 2021 ND 23 Highlight: A district court’s findings of fact will not be reversed on appeal unless clearly erroneous.
District court findings based on assessment of witness credibility are given deference. Upon the showing of a prima facie case under a psychological parent claim, the movant is entitled to an evidentiary proceeding. A district court’s decision whether to appoint a parenting investigator is discretionary and will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. The standard of review in determining whether a district court erred in delaying a hearing on an emergency motion under Rule 8.2, N.D.R.Ct., is abuse of discretion. |
|
Estate of Johnson 2021 ND 22 Highlight: In an informal, unsupervised probate, an order settling all claims of one claimant is final, even if there are pending claims by other claimants. |
|
State v. Youngbird 2021 ND 21 Highlight: A district court has jurisdiction to amend a criminal judgment to include restitution when the State files the motion to amend within the time limit imposed by the court during sentencing. |
|
Matter of Hehn 2021 ND 20 Highlight: District court orders denying petition for discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Johnson v. Menard 2021 ND 19 Highlight: During trial, a party can make a motion for judgment as a matter of law alleging insufficient evidence under N.D.R.Civ.P. 50(a). However, after the jury returns its verdict the party must renew the motion under N.D.R.Civ.P. 50(b) to preserve the sufficiency of the evidence issue for review on appeal. |
|
State v. Watson 2021 ND 18 Highlight: A defendant may not withdraw a guilty plea after the court has imposed a sentence unless the defendant proves that withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice. |
|
Willprecht v. Willprecht 2021 ND 17 Highlight: A district court’s use, on remand, of its previous Ruff-Fischer guidelines analysis is not by itself clearly erroneous. |