Search Tips

New opinions: July 22 Thursday, July 22, 2021

The Supreme Court has issued seven 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:

State v. Schmidt, et al. 2021 ND 137
Docket No.: 20210156
Filing Date: 7/22/2021
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Rule 32(c)(2), N.D.R.Crim.P., does not provide the district court with authority to order that defense counsel be allowed to be present for a psycho-sexual evaluation. The district court has no authority under section 12.1-01-04(26), N.D.C.C., to order the Department of Human Services to allow defense counsel to be present during such an evaluation. A defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel is satisfied when defense counsel is given notice and an opportunity to consult with the defendant prior to the evaluation.

City of West Fargo v. McAllister, et al. 2021 ND 136
Docket No.: 20200324
Filing Date: 7/22/2021
Case Type: OTHER (Civil)
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald W.

Highlight: A certification under N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) should not be routinely granted and is reserved for cases involving unusual circumstances where failure to allow an immediate appeal would create a demonstrated prejudice or hardship.

A district court should articulate in writing the reasons supporting its decision to grant certification under N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b).

State v. Stands 2021 ND 135
Docket No.: 20210053
Filing Date: 7/22/2021
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A person standing in an open doorway is in a public place and may be arrested without a warrant permitting entry into the home.

Investigatory stops are justified if there is reasonable and articulable suspicion a person has committed or is about to commit a crime.

Evidence should not be suppressed or excluded as fruit of the poisonous tree unless the alleged illegality is at least a but-for cause of obtaining the evidence.

Williams v. Williams, et al. 2021 ND 134
Docket No.: 20210014
Filing Date: 7/22/2021
Case Type: CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A district court’s decision to modify parenting time may be affirmed, despite sparse findings of fact, when its rationale is clear from the record.

Section 14-09.2-08, N.D.C.C., only requires a specific good-cause finding when the district court terminates or modifies a parenting coordinator’s appointment on its own motion.

Due process requires parties receive adequate notice and a fair opportunity to be heard.

Froehlich v. Froehlich, et al. 2021 ND 133
Docket No.: 20200308
Filing Date: 7/22/2021
Case Type: CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Under N.D.R.App.P. 4(a)(1), a party has 60 days from service of notice of entry of the judgment to file an appeal.

Only judgments constituting a final judgment of the rights of the parties and certain orders enumerated by statute are appealable.

Yoney v. State 2021 ND 132
Docket No.: 20200359
Filing Date: 7/22/2021
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: This Court, on its own motion, may notice errors to which no objection has been taken if the errors are obvious or if they otherwise seriously affect the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.

Smith v. Isakson, et al. 2021 ND 131
Docket No.: 20210004
Filing Date: 7/22/2021
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald W.

Highlight: The Sixth Amendment does not extend the right to a jury trial for a violation of a Bismarck ordinance restricting the use of public property.

Citizens of our state may have greater protections under the North Dakota Constitution than the United States Constitution.

The North Dakota Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial for an infraction-level violation of a Bismarck ordinance restricting the use of public property.