All News

Judicial Branch audit for biennium completed

Fri, 10 Jul 2026 05:00:00 GMT

The Office of the State Auditor has issued an Audit Report for the biennium ended June 30, 2025 for the Judicial Branch of the State of North Dakota. The report includes the following summary: "This audit did not identify any areas of concern." In the introduction to the audit report, North Dakota State Auditor Josh C. Gallion noted, "We wish to express our appreciation to the Judicial Branch staff for the courtesy, cooperation, and assistance they provided to us during this audit."

The audit may be read here: Download

The Judicial Branch financial and accounting team is led by State Court Administrator Sally Holewa, Director of Finance Donald Wolf, and Accounting Supervisor Dion Ulrich.

8th Circuit decides N.D. Case

Fri, 10 Jul 2026 05:00:00 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit decided U.S. v. Lekemia Caster, U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 25-2103, on July 10, 2026.

Read the court's decision here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/07/252103P.pdf

New opinions: July 9, 2026

Thu, 09 Jul 2026 09:00:00 GMT

State v. Chamberlain 2026 ND 135
Docket No.: 20260008
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Attempted Murder
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's criminal judgments are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

State v. Chamberlain 2026 ND 135
Docket No.: 20260009
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's criminal judgments are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Reierson v. Reierson 2026 ND 142
Docket No.: 20250415
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A final contempt order must be appealed within sixty days. Incorporating a final contempt order into a subsequent judgment does not restart the time to appeal.

An appeal waiver not incorporated into a judgment is still enforceable as a contract between the parties but is narrowly construed. Under contract
principles, the parties did not waive the right to appeal the issues that were carved out for judicial determination, but only the issues the parties had resolved by stipulation.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by awarding a limited amount of attorney's fees under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.5 where the fees requested spanned multiple litigation issues and the requesting party failed to segregate the fee request between the issue relevant to the award of attorney's fees and all of the other issues.

State v. Kanneh 2026 ND 137
Docket No.: 20250427
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted the defendant of continuous sexual abuse of a child is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

State v. Warner 2026 ND 133
Docket No.: 20260036
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An appellant's failure to file transcripts of evidentiary hearings may preclude appellate review of an issue.

A defendant consents to warrantless searches of property in his control by accepting a condition of probation allowing such searches.

A district court does not abuse its discretion in revoking probation when the court relies on its findings that defendant violated conditions of defendant's probation.

Egan v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., et al. 2026 ND 140
Docket No.: 20250391
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Registering to do business in North Dakota, by itself, is not sufficient contact for jurisdiction to attach to a foreign corporation.

Failure to assert an affirmative defense in a lawsuit dismissed without prejudice does not bar the defense in a subsequent case.

Negotiating dismissal of a lawsuit does not constitute the purposeful availment due process requires for personal jurisdiction over a nonresident.

Rustan v. Ball, et al. 2026 ND 143
Docket No.: 20260017
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Parenting time determinations are findings of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review. When restrictions on parenting time are imposed, the district court must articulate findings supporting the limitations, but the limitations need not follow a rigid verbal formula as long as they are fairly discernible by deduction or inference.

Stepped parenting time advancement provisions cannot be delegated to nonjudicial actors without defined standards or a mechanism for judicial review.

Warner v. State 2026 ND 138
Docket No.: 20260041
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A judgment denying a postconviction relief application is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Hanson v. Dabbert Custom Homes, et al. 2026 ND 139
Docket No.: 20260023
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A defendant's filing of a third-party complaint, standing alone, does not result in the forfeiture of a statute of limitations defense.

The accrual of a cause of action under the discovery rule does not require a party to have full knowledge of the extent of an injury, but rather knowledge of facts sufficient to put a person of ordinary intelligence on enough inquiry to trigger the responsibility to promptly investigate.

A homeowner had inquiry notice of a potential construction defect claim involving insulation where he noticed persistent cold conditions in a specific area of the home as well as frost buildup and significant temperature differentials within one year of purchasing the home.

Once a cause of action has accrued, a contractor's subsequent repair and remediation activity does not retroactively alter the accrual date, but rather becomes the subject of equitable estoppel.

In construction defect cases, a contractor’s good faith repair activity, standing alone, does not constitute conduct calculated to induce the homeowner to forbear from filing suit; the contractor can still invoke the statute of limitations against an equitable estoppel claim absent evidence the contractor made a promise to repair in exchange for a promise not to sue.

L.G.L., et al. v. County of Cass, et al. 2026 ND 136
Docket No.: 20250343
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A dismissal without prejudice has no res judicata effect because there has been no decision on the merits; a federal judgment dismissing a state-law claim without prejudice under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46 and resolving only the federal constitutional claims does not preclude a later state-court action on the negligence and wrongful-death claims.

The disability extender in N.D.C.C. § 28-01-25 applies by its terms to any action other than the three it excepts and reaches wrongful-death actions under
N.D.C.C. § 28-01-18(4); the absence of a cross-reference to § 28-01-25 in subsection 4 does not, by negative implication, withdraw wrongful-death claims
from the extender's reach.

A wrongful-death claim accrues at the time of death under N.D.C.C. § 28-01- 18(4); the objective-discovery standard of BASF Corp. v. Symington fixes the date of accrual but does not cut off the § 28-01-25 disability extension, which the Legislature limited by time rather than knowledge. BASF Corp. v. Symington, 512 N.W.2d 692, 696 (N.D. 1994).

Magana v. State 2026 ND 141
Docket No.: 20260046
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An applicant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea based on ineffective assistance of counsel must satisfy a two-part test. The second prong of the test requires a showing of prejudice. The applicant must convince the district court that a decision to reject the plea bargain would have been rational under the circumstances. An applicant's subjective self-serving statement that he would have insisted on going to trial absent deficient representation is not sufficient to establish prejudice.

Cowan v. Slann, et al. 2026 ND 131
Docket No.: 20250367
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: In non-divorce cases, a party's voluntary acceptance of the full amount of a judgment, without reserving any issues for appeal, waives that party's right to appeal from the judgment.

White Star Royalty Co., et al. v. McGahey Oil, et al. 2026 ND 132
Docket No.: 20260050
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An amended judgment in a quiet title action is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (6), and (8). A pre-filing order designating a vexatious litigant is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). An appellant is ordered to pay the appellees' costs and attorney's fees under N.D.R.App.P. 38.

Foley v. State 2026 ND 134
Docket No.: 20260071
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Januszewski v. WSI 2026 ND 144
Docket No.: 20260175
Filing Date: 7/9/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment affirming an administrative law judge's order upholding a North Dakota Workforce Safety and Insurance decision denying a claim for workers' compensation benefits is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).

Vacancy in Judgeship No. 5, North Central Judicial District

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 09:00:00 GMT

An order regarding the vacancy in North Central Judicial District Judgeship No. 5, with chambers in Minot, is posted on the public portal here: https://portal.ctrack.ndcourts.gov/portal/court/68f021c4-6a44-4735-9a76-5360b2e8af13/case/eedfa480-5990-4859-8d12-2e521a309b8d

This notice is provided under N.D.R.Proc.R. § 7.

Public Notice: Reappointment of Incumbent U.S. Magistrate Judge

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 05:00:00 GMT

Public Notice: Reappointment of Incumbent U.S. Magistrate Judge

The current term of Clare R. Hochhalter, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota, is set to expire on February 7, 2027.

The United States District Court for the District of North Dakota is required by law to establish a panel of citizens to consider Judge Hochhalter’s reappointment to a new eight-year term.

The duties of a Magistrate Judge include: (1) conducting most preliminary proceedings in criminal cases; (2) conducting trials and disposing of misdemeanor criminal cases; (3) conducting various pretrial matters and evidentiary proceedings in civil and criminal cases when delegated by a district judge; and (4) conducting trials and disposing of civil cases upon consent of the parties.

The court invites comments from members of the bar and the public regarding whether the panel should recommend Judge Hochhalter for reappointment. Written comments should be directed to: Kari Knudson, Clerk of Court, U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, P.O. Box 1193, Bismarck, ND 58502-1193 or ndd_public@ndd.uscourts.gov

Comments must be received by July 31, 2026.

8th Circuit Decides North Dakota Case

Wed, 08 Jul 2026 05:00:00 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit decided Murphy v. Continental Resources, Inc., U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 24-3494, on July 8, 2026.

View the court's decision here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/07/243494P.pdf

Justia Opinion Summary

The case concerns disputes between two groups of North Dakota surface landowners and an oil and gas company with rights to drill on their land. After the company gave statutory notice and commenced drilling, the landowners and the company were unable to reach an agreement on compensation for damages to the land, as required by North Dakota’s Oil and Gas Production Damage Compensation Act. Both sets of landowners, represented by the same law firm, filed separate lawsuits in federal court seeking compensation for damages. The cases involved substantial litigation over discovery, scheduling, expert witnesses, and attorneys’ fees, with mediation attempts failing. Eventually, the parties reached stipulated judgments settling the claims for monetary amounts.

After settlement, the landowners sought attorneys’ fees under North Dakota law, submitting discounted requests and supporting invoices. The company objected, arguing that the requests were excessive given the simplicity of the dispute and raising concerns such as alleged excessive billing, duplicative work, and poor documentation. The company also requested an in-person hearing on the fee motions, which was denied.

The United States District Court for the District of North Dakota applied the lodestar method to determine reasonable attorneys’ fees, starting with the actual fees incurred, then reducing the amounts based on factors such as poor documentation and litigation conduct. The court awarded the landowners more than they requested, after finding the hourly rates and the time expended reasonable, but applying a 10% reduction for documentation issues and delays. The court also denied the company’s motion for oral argument.

On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its fee award calculations, its consideration of relevant factors, or in denying an oral argument. The court found that the district court’s approach and reductions were consistent with precedent and North Dakota law. (Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/24-3502/24-3502-2026-07-08.html?utm_source=summary-newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2026-07-09-u-s-court-of-appeals-for-the-eighth-circuit-69a6a106f9&utm_content=text-case-title-1)

Notices of Comment

Mon, 06 Jul 2026 05:05:00 GMT

Notice(s) of Comment have been issued by the Supreme Court in the following matters:

20260231 – Amend. to North Dakota Rule of Civil Procedure 4 Regarding Persons Subject to Jurisdiction: Process; and Service

20260235 - Amend. to North Dakota Rules of Appellate Procedure 4 Regarding Appeals and When Taken and 28 Regarding Briefs

20260236 - Amend. to North Dakota Rule of Court 8.2 Regarding Interim Orders in Domestic Relations Cases

20260238 - Amend. to North Dakota Rules of Appellate Procedure 21 Regarding Writs and 30 Regarding References to the Record

20250325, 20260234 - Amend. to North Dakota Rule of Court 8.8, Appendix F Regarding Alternative Dispute Resolution

This notice is provided under N.D.R.Proc.R. § 7.

U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota essay contest winners

Mon, 06 Jul 2026 05:00:00 GMT

In celebration of America’s 250th birthday, the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota held an essay contest for North Dakota students in grades 6–12. Organized by the court's Federal Practice Committee’s Civic Engagement Subcommittee, the contest invited students to submit an essay answering a state-specific or national prompt.

The court is proud to announce the winners:

Middle School: Jake Hausmann (North Star School, Cando)
High School: Fatima Diaby (Sheyenne High School, West Fargo)

Each winner will receive a $250 prize and an invitation to visit their local federal courthouse. In additton, the winning essays will be published in The Gavel, the official magazine of the State Bar Association of North Dakota.

Annual Report on Departures from Mandatory Minimum Sentence

Mon, 06 Jul 2026 05:00:00 GMT

North Dakota Century Code 12.1-32-02.3(3) requires the State Court Administrator to prepare an annual report on departures from mandatory minimum sentences for violations of chapter 19-03.1 and to make the report available on the world wide web.

During the time period of July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026, a departure from a mandatory minimum sentence was ordered in the following cases:

31-2025-CR-264 St. vs. Hailey Dreese

45-2025-CR-869, St. vs. Jeffrey Reynolds

Report prepared On July 1, 2026 by Sally A. Holewa, State Court Administrator

Job Announcement: Assistant Attorney General - Bismarck

Mon, 06 Jul 2026 05:00:00 GMT

ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL

Position No: 125-28876

Position Title: Natural Resources and Native American Affairs General Counsel

Salary Range: Commensurate with Experience. Click for Total Rewards Calculator

Closing Date: July 15, 2026

Status: Full-Time with State Benefit Package Recruitment: Internal/External

Location: 500 North 9th Street, Bismarck, ND

Selecting Supervisor: Matthew Sagsveen, Director, Natural Resources and Native American Affairs Division

Summary of Work

The Attorney General is the chief legal officer for the state of North Dakota, and the Attorney General’s Office serves more than 70 state agencies, boards, and commissions, as well as the University System. The Attorney General is dedicated to deliver the highest quality professional and ethical legal services to state officials, agencies, and people of the state of North Dakota.

The Natural Resources and Native American Affairs Division, a division of the North Dakota Office of Attorney General, is seeking an experienced attorney to lead and manage a legal portfolio including complex oil and gas, property, energy law, and other natural resources cases as assigned.

Typical duties for this position may include working collaboratively with the division director and attorneys on the following tasks:

Facilitate strong working relationships with state agency clients and stakeholders
Legal research, writing, discovery, motion practice, document preparation, and trial or hearing preparation
Represent clients in administrative and civil proceedings
Administrative case management and tracking
Appellate advocacy
Manage clients’ legal operations
Respond to legal correspondence
Monitor, draft, and review legislation, and provide legislative testimony as needed
Manage outside counsel

The Ideal Candidate:

Has at least two years of experience, preferably in the oil and gas or natural resources related industry.
Easily engages and communicates with others orally and in writing.
Self-motivated to conduct research, analyze complex legal issues, and ensure accuracy of work.
Has excellent organizational skills.
Demonstrates an ability to provide sound judgment including the ability to think critically, identify, break down and evaluate complex legal issues, and write in a concise and logical manner.
Thrives on solving and managing unique or unprecedented legal questions and issues.
Finds it rewarding to be highly dependable and work on significant issues impacting North Dakota.

Division staff are given the opportunity to participate in local, regional, and national training courses for topics such as general counsel training, advanced litigation skills such as deposition training, appellate advocacy, e-discovery, and negotiations.

In addition to the monthly salary based upon experience and demonstrated competency, this position includes fully paid health insurance for employee and family, the option to participate in employee-paid dental and vision for employee and family, participation in the state NDPERS defined benefit retirement plans, as well as the option to participate in the 457 deferred compensation plan, and the option to contribute to a medical spending account. The position also includes annual and sick leave benefits.

Employees in this position are eligible for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program.

Location of Work:

The Division office is centrally located in Bismarck, North Dakota.

Minimum Qualifications

Licensed to practice law in North Dakota, or the expectation of imminent admission to the North Dakota bar.
2+ years of experience is preferred.
Experience in the oil and gas or natural resources related industry is preferred, but not required.
High ethical standards and a clean disciplinary record.
Ability to maintain a high degree of confidentiality.
Advanced interpersonal skills needed to work well with the public.
The judgment, reliability, and willingness to devote time and energy necessary to provide excellent legal services to the State of North Dakota.
Ability, demonstrated in previous employment experience or otherwise shown, to establish and maintain effective, harmonious working relationships with clients, colleagues, and supervisors.
Excellent time management and organization skills.
Proven ability or potential to produce excellent legal work product.
Successful completion of the interview process, reference checks, and standard background and criminal record checks to determine knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform assistant attorney general tasks.

About Team ND

"Far and away the best prize life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." - Theodore Roosevelt

More than 7,500 talented, hard-working people across sixty-three agencies have come together as Team North Dakota. At Team ND, we are driven to succeed through gratitude, humility, curiosity and courage. Our purpose is to empower people, improve lives, and inspire success. Join us in being legendary.

Total Rewards: The State of North Dakota is committed to providing team members with a strong and competitive rewards package that support you, your health and your family.

Considering a new position on Team ND? How does your current position stack up? Use our Total Rewards Calculator to estimate.

Application Procedures

Applicants are screened based on qualifications, successful completion of the interview process and a background and criminal investigation. Applicants must be currently authorized to work in the United States on a full-time basis. The Office of Attorney General does not provide sponsorships.

Application package must be received by 11:59 PM on the closing date listed on the opening.

TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS POSITION APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE AT: www.nd.gov/careers

Documents to be submitted:

Resume
Cover letter with a summary that clearly explains how the applicant's work experience is related to the summary of work and minimum/preferred qualifications
3 Professional References
College Transcripts (copies or unofficial versions are acceptable for the initial application process but when the top candidate is given a conditional employment offer, they are required to present official transcripts)

The North Dakota Office of Attorney General prohibits candidates from plagiarizing any portion of their employment application and interview process to include responses to questions in which you must provide a narrative and/or verbal response. You must create your own responses originally and not copy or adapt them from other sources. While the North Dakota Office of Attorney General encourages you to create your narratives and interview responses with great care, including correct use of grammar and style, you are prohibited from using any artificial intelligence (AI) or AI-assisted tool, to include but not limited to ChatGPT during the interview process. Any information you provide during the application and interview process is subject to verification. The North Dakota Office of Attorney General will discontinue your candidacy if we find you have violated this prohibition on use of AI tools in the application and interview process.

All hiring decisions are subject to approval by the Attorney General. No offer of employment is final or binding until approved by the Attorney General.

Learn more about Office of Attorney General at: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/
Learn more about Employment Benefits at: https://www.nd.gov/omb/public/careers/team-nd-benefits
Visit North Dakota State government: http://www.nd.gov

To learn more about living in North Dakota, visit https://findthegoodlife.com

Equal Employment Opportunity

The State of North Dakota and this hiring agency do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex (including sexual orientation and gender identity), genetics, religion, age or disability in employment or the provisions of services and complies with the provisions of the North Dakota Human Rights Act.

As an employer, the State of North Dakota prohibits smoking in all places of state employment in accordance with N.D.C.C. § 23-12-10.

View the complete job posting here: https://www.cnd.nd.gov/psc/recruit/EMPLOYEE/HRMS/c/HRS_HRAM_FL.HRS_CG_SEARCH_FL.GBL?Page=HRS_APP_JBPST_FL&Action=U&SiteId=11000&FOCUS=Applicant&JobOpeningId=3032696&PostingSeq=1

2026 report on departures from mandatory minimum sentences

Wed, 01 Jul 2026 16:24:36 GMT

The state court administrator has issued the annual report on departures from mandatory minimum sentences for the period from July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026.

Download the report.

Judge William F. Hodny 1932 - 2026

Wed, 01 Jul 2026 15:00:26 GMT

Former District Judge and Supreme Court Surrogate Judge William F. Hodny died June 30, 2026. A visitation will be held July 8, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. followed by a service at 11:00 a.m. at DaWise-Perry Funeral Home in Mandan, North Dakota. A burial will occur at the Veterens Cemetery in Mandan at 1:00 p.m..

Job Announcement: Assistant Attorney General - CPAT - Bismarck

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 05:00:00 GMT

ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
Position No: 125-689
Salary Range: $81,000 - $120,000 annually (salary increases with experience). Click for Total Rewards Calculator
Closing Date: July 10, 2026
Status: Full-Time with State Benefit Package Recruitment: Internal/External
Location: Consumer Protection and Antitrust Division 1720 Burlington Drive, Suite C, Bismarck
Selecting Supervisor: Elin S. Alm, Director, Consumer Protection and Antitrust Division

Summary of Position and Work
The Consumer Protection and Antitrust Division of the North Dakota Attorney General’s Office has an immediate opening for a full-time attorney. This position provides legal, investigation, and litigation services to the Attorney General and division relating to enforcement of consumer protection and antitrust laws.

This is an opportunity to do exciting work in a dynamic area of the law. This position presents a chance to work on investigations and cases that impact local markets and consumers and offers a unique opportunity to collaborate with other states or federal agencies on cases with national scope, impact, and interest. The successful applicant will have the opportunity to gain in depth experience in consumer protection and antitrust law, as well as complex civil litigation, while working in a fun and engaging work environment and maintaining a healthy work-life balance.

Responsibilities include evaluating, preparing, advancing, and concluding consumer protection and antitrust cases through litigation or settlement. Division staff have access to regional and national training courses in consumer protection and antitrust law, as well as other topics that advance civil investigation, settlement, and litigation skills. This is an in-person position, and a remote work arrangement is not an option.

In addition to the monthly salary, this position includes fully paid health insurance for employee and family, the option to participate in employee-paid dental and vision for employee and family, participation in the state NDPERS defined contribution retirement plan as well as the option to participate in the 457 deferred compensation plan, the option to contribute to a medical spending account, and earning annual and sick leave.

Minimum Qualifications
1. Licensed to practice law in North Dakota, or the expectation of imminent admission to the North Dakota Bar.
2. Preference will be given to applicants with 2 or more years of legal experience including litigation experience.
3. High ethical standards; clean discipline record.
4. Ability to maintain a high degree of confidentiality.
5. Excellent written and verbal communication skills.
6. Excellent legal research skills and ability to effectively use Westlaw or other research tools.
7. Advanced interpersonal skills needed to work well with the public, other agencies, courts and others.
8. Ability and willingness to do excellent legal work in the areas of litigation, research and writing, investigations, and negotiations.
9. Ability to establish and maintain effective, harmonious working relationships.
10. Excellent time management and organization skills.
11. Ability to effectively use case management, document management, and e-discovery platforms and software.
12. Ability to exercise independent judgment and professional discretion in the identification, management, and resolution of alleged violations of law and related legal issues.
13. Successful completion of the interview process, reference checks, and standard background and criminal record checks to determine knowledge, skills, and abilities to perform assistant attorney general tasks.

Application Procedures
Applicants are screened based on qualifications, successful completion of the interview process and a background and criminal investigation. Applicants must be currently authorized to work in the United States on a full-time basis. The Office of Attorney General does not provide sponsorships.

Application package must be received by 11:59 PM on the closing date listed on the opening.

TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS POSITION APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED ONLINE AT: www.nd.gov/careers

Documents to be submitted:
• Resume
• Cover letter with a summary that clearly explains how the applicant's work experience is related to the summary of work and minimum/preferred qualifications
• 3 Professional References
• College Transcripts (copies or unofficial versions are acceptable for the initial application process but when the top candidate is given a conditional employment offer, they are required to present official transcripts)

The North Dakota Office of Attorney General prohibits candidates from plagiarizing any portion of their employment application and interview process to include responses to questions in which you must provide a narrative and/or verbal response. You must create your own responses originally and not copy or adapt them from other sources. While the North Dakota Office of Attorney General encourages you to create your narratives and interview responses with great care, including correct use of grammar and style, you are prohibited from using any artificial intelligence (AI) or AI-assisted tool, to include but not limited to ChatGPT, during the interview. Any information you provide during the application and interview process is subject to verification. The North Dakota Office of Attorney General will discontinue your candidacy if we find you have violated this prohibition on use of AI tools in the application and interview process.

Anyone needing assistance or accommodations during any part of the application or interview process please contact Ashley, Office of Attorney General: E-mail: aeisenbeis@nd.gov; phone: (701) 328-1256 or TTY: 1-800-366-6888.
• Learn more about Office of Attorney General at: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/
• Learn more about Employment Benefits at: https://www.nd.gov/omb/public/careers/team-nd-benefits
• Visit North Dakota State government: http://www.nd.gov

To learn more about living in North Dakota, visit https://findthegoodlife.com

Equal Employment Opportunity

As an employer, the State of North Dakota prohibits smoking in all places of state employment in accordance with N.D.C.C. § 23-12-10.

Job Announcement: Assistant Attorney General MFCU - Bismarck

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 05:00:00 GMT

ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
Position No: 125-31482
Salary Range: Commensurate with Experience.
Closing Date: July 9, 2026
Status: Full-Time with State Benefit Package Recruitment: Internal/External
Location: Medicaid Fraud Control Unit Office, Bismarck, ND
Selecting Supervisor: Jessica Binder, Director, Medicaid Fraud Control Unit

8th Circuit decides North Dakota Case

Fri, 26 Jun 2026 05:00:00 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit decided U.S. v. Jonathon Smith, U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 25-2177.

Read the court's decision here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/06/252177U.pdf

New opinions: June 25, 2026

Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:00:00 GMT

Interest of A.S.H. 2026 ND 123
Docket No.: 20260171
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court's denial of a motion to vacate an order finding Appellant in default is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Interest of A.T.E. 2026 ND 123
Docket No.: 20260172
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court's denial of a motion to vacate an order finding Appellant in default is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Interest of A.L. 2026 ND 123
Docket No.: 20260173
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court's denial of a motion to vacate an order finding Appellant in default is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Interest of A.L. 2026 ND 123
Docket No.: 20260174
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court's denial of a motion to vacate an order finding Appellant in default is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

State v. Smith Redman 2026 ND 121
Docket No.: 20260032
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Bjerke, et al. v. North Dakota Legislative Assembly, et al. 2026 ND 118
Docket No.: 20260027
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Original Proceeding - Civil - Writ of Injunction
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Under N.D. Const. art. VI, § 2, the supreme court has authority to exercise original jurisdiction to issue, hear, and determine such original and remedial writs as may be necessary to properly exercise its jurisdiction. This authority is discretionary and cannot be invoked as a matter of right.

The supreme court will determine for itself, on an ad hoc basis, whether a particular case is within its discretionary original jurisdiction and invokes its original jurisdiction only in cases publici juris and those affecting the sovereignty of the state, its franchises and prerogatives, or the liberties of its people.

Courts adjudicate only actual controversies. An issue is not justiciable if it is moot or not ripe for review, a party lacks standing, or resolving it would be advisory.

Constitutional provisions are interpreted according to the same principles of statutory construction.

In adopting Senate Concurrent Resolution 4008, the Legislative Assembly violated N.D. Const. art. XV, § 4, which limits its general authority to propose a constitutional amendment under N.D. Const. art. IV, § 16, to alter or repeal the term limitations established in N.D. Const. art. XV, § 1.

Hovey v. NDDOT 2026 ND 122
Docket No.: 20260082
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Friese, Mark A.

Highlight: The approved method for alcohol chemical testing requires a 20-minute wait after an invalidated test prior to a second test. The alcohol chemical testing process begins when the first step, the diagnostic test, is administered.

The hearing officer did not err in admitting the test record when the report timestamps and deputy's testimony both supported the determination the test was fairly administered.

Friesz v. State 2026 ND 124
Docket No.: 20260095
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's judgment dismissing an application for postconviction relief on summary disposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6).

Danduran v. Eddy Cty. Zoning Bd., et al. 2026 ND 125
Docket No.: 20260048
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Zoning
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: The statutory appeal procedures in N.D.C.C. §§ 11-33-12 and 28-34-01 provide the exclusive means of judicial review for challenges to county zoning decisions. A party may not circumvent those procedures by bringing a separate action for declaratory or injunctive relief alleging procedural defects, public-comment violations, or conflicts of interest when those claims ultimately challenge the validity of the zoning decision itself.

Clooten v. Clooten, et al. 2026 ND 126
Docket No.: 20260025
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A district court has broad discretion in making contempt decisions, and this Court reverses a contempt finding only for an abuse of discretion. Contempt includes the willful and inexcusable intent to disobey a court order.

After a finding of contempt, the choice of remedial sanctions rests within the district court's discretion. A compensable loss cannot rest on speculation, but it need not reach mathematical precision, and a sanction stands when it has a factual basis and falls within the range of the evidence.

Only an order finally determining the parties' rights qualifies as appealable. An order leaving a motion pending for further proceedings is not an appealable order.

McDermott v. State 2026 ND 127
Docket No.: 20260039
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's order and judgment denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

State v. Boynton 2026 ND 120
Docket No.: 20260010
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Hindering Law Enforcement
Author: Friese, Mark A.

Highlight: A district court must ascertain a factual basis under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(3) prior to accepting a guilty plea. The factual basis must provide facts to support all elements of the charged offense.

A district court's failure to ascertain a factual basis as required by N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(3) constitutes an obvious error under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b).

Sanchez v. State 2026 ND 128
Docket No.: 20260022
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The denial of an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

State v. Rangeloff 2026 ND 117
Docket No.: 20250453
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Child Abuse/Child Neglect
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment for child neglect is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Moos v. WSI 2026 ND 119
Docket No.: 20250437
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Section 65-01-09, N.D.C.C., authorizes subrogation interests to Workforce Safety and Insurance when an injured employee recovers damages from a third party. In administrative workers' compensation proceedings, N.D.C.C. § 65-01-09 replaces the equitable doctrine of judicial estoppel.

Section 28-32-44(3), N.D.C.C., allows a district court to waive record preparation and filing costs for an appellant upon submission of an application showing the appellant is a "low-income person." A district court does not abuse its discretion in ordering an appellant to pay record costs when an appellant fails to submit a complete application for waiver of costs.

Associated General Contractors of North Dakota, et al. v. City of West Fargo 2026 ND 129
Docket No.: 20250434
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A case is moot when the occurrence of an event or the lapse of time has made it so there is no actual controversy and no effective relief a court to provide. Courts will determine a moot issue rather than dismiss an appeal if the controversy is one of great public interest. The public interest exception to mootness may apply when a claim involves a law facilitating scrupulous handling of government affairs. The public interest exception does not extend to issues that are particular to a specific locality. A dispute, although local, may affect the public interest when it implicates the scope of authority of public officials across the state.

The Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 32-23, authorizes courts to declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. The Act was adopted with the intent of providing a means for litigants to have controversies determined by a court in advance of any invasion of rights or breach of obligation. The declaratory judgment statutes do not displace ordinary jurisdictional requirements. Future action contemplated by a municipality, although not yet taken, may constitute a threat of injury providing standing to seek declaratory relief.

State v. Pope 2026 ND 116
Docket No.: 20250416
Filing Date: 6/25/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: The factual assertions in an affidavit of probable cause filed in a joined case whose charges were dismissed with prejudice are not an impermissible sentencing factor.

A sentencing court is allowed the widest possible range of information and may consider unproven and even inadmissible evidence, the evidence of record, and the reasonable inferences that evidence supports. State v. Wells, 265 N.W.2d 239, 242-43 (N.D. 1978); State v. Hamilton, 2023 ND 233, ¶ 11, 999 N.W.2d 214; N.D.R.Ev. 1101(d)(3)(D)-(E).

Although a pending criminal charge is an impermissible sentencing factor because relying on it penalizes the defendant for exercising the constitutional right to trial, dismissal with prejudice removes that concern because the charge will never be tried. State v. Hoverson, 2006 ND 49, ¶¶ 35, 37, 710 N.W.2d 890.

8th Circuit decides North Dakota Case

Thu, 25 Jun 2026 05:00:00 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit decided Austin Fraase v. Advantage Credit Bureau on June 25, 2026, U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 25-1872

View the court's decision here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/06/251872P.pdf

Governor Kelly Armstrong declares Legal Assistant/Paralegal Day

Wed, 24 Jun 2026 05:00:00 GMT

Governor Kelly Armstrong declared Thursday, June 25, 2026, Legal Assistant/Paralegal Day. Governor Armstrong presented the proclamation to members of the Western Dakota Association of Legal Assistants. To view the proclamation, click here Legal Assistant & Paralegal Day - 2026.pdf

Pictured, from L to R: Deyan Junker; Trisha Kinnischtzke; Megan Klym; Anna Jellesed; Governor Kelly Armstrong; Melissa Hamilton, ACP; Melissa Klimpel, ACP; Ashley Miller, ACP; Erica Norris

Pictured above, L to R: Deyan Junker; Trisha Kinnischtzke; Megan Klym; Anna Jellesed; Attorney General Drew Wrigley; Melissa Hamilton, ACP; Melissa Klimpel, ACP; Ashley Miller, ACP; Erica Norris

8th Circuit decides North Dakota case

Wed, 24 Jun 2026 05:00:00 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit decided Sophia Wilansky v. Morton County, North Dakota, U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 24-1911.

View the court's decision here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/06/241911P.pdf

From Justia Daily Opinion Summary:

"During protests opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline in November 2016, Sophia Wilansky was severely injured when police fired an aerial warning munition that struck her arm. Earlier that night, officers had ordered Wilansky and another protester to disperse from a barricade on a closed bridge, warning that they would use less-lethal munitions if the order was ignored. When Wilansky and the other protester did not comply, officers fired various less-lethal munitions. After Wilansky began retreating, she was struck by the aerial munition, causing permanent injury to her left hand and forearm.

Following the incident, Wilansky filed two lawsuits in the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. She alleged, under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, that county and state officers used excessive force in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments and that Morton County maintained unconstitutional policies or customs. During the litigation, the district court struck certain new allegations and defendants from one complaint and ordered Wilansky to file an amended complaint. Wilansky then filed a second lawsuit with additional allegations against the stricken defendants. The district court ultimately dismissed both cases with prejudice.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgments. The court held that Wilansky did not sufficiently plead that the officers’ actions amounted to a clearly established Fourth Amendment seizure, nor did her allegations meet the “shocks the conscience” standard required for a Fourteenth Amendment claim. The court further held that she failed to establish a pattern of unconstitutional conduct by Morton County as of the date of her injury. Finally, the Eighth Circuit concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the claims with prejudice." (Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/24-1911/24-1911-2026-06-24.html?utm_source=summary-newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2026-06-25-u-s-court-of-appeals-for-the-eighth-circuit-53e1196007&utm_content=text-case-title-2)

Chief Justice McEvers provides keynote address at Boys State

Tue, 23 Jun 2026 05:00:00 GMT

Chief Justice Lisa Fair McEvers recently provided the keynote address at Boys State and swore in newly elected Cayle Corey and the other elected officials at Boys State. Corey is the son of attorney Amanda Corey of Grand Forks. Earlier in the day, Chief Justice McEvers also served on a panel discussion at Girls State.

North Dakota Boys State and Girls State are leadership and civics programs sponsored by the American Legion and American Legion Auxiliary that give high school juniors a hands-on look at government. Rather than simply learning about civics in the classroom, participants experience it firsthand by running for office, holding elections, writing laws, and serving in simulated city, county, and state government while developing leadership and citizenship skills.

Above, Chief Justice Fair McEvers swears in Cayle Corey as attendees look on at Boys State.

Chief Justice Fair McEvers, second from the right, takes part in the panel discussion at Girls State.