Franciere v. City of Mandan
Docket No. 20190122
Oral Argument:
Waived
Docket Info
- Title
- Susan Franciere, Plaintiff and Appellant
v.
City of Mandan, Defendant and Appellee - Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : OTHER (Civil)
- Appeal From
-
Case No. 2017-CV-00914
South Central Judicial District, Morton County
James S. Hill
2019 ND 233932 N.W.2d 907
Highlight
A district court must rule on a motion to dismiss for insufficiency of service and lack of personal jurisdiction before adjudicating the merits of a claim.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
Seq. # | Filing Date | Description | Attachment |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 04/11/2019 | NOTICE OF APPEAL : 04/11/2019 | |
2 | 04/12/2019 | NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV. | |
3 | 04/12/2019 | Notice served on Susan Franciere and Scott K. Porsborg | |
4 | 05/10/2019 | ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MAY 9, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. 1-87) | |
5 | 05/20/2019 | APPELLANT BRIEF | View |
6 | 05/20/2019 | APPELLANT APPENDIX | |
7 | 05/28/2019 | rec'd nonsubstantive corrections to Appellant's Appendix | |
8 | 05/30/2019 | Rec'd 6 copies of ATB & ATA from Central Duplicating | |
9 | 06/19/2019 | APPELLEE BRIEF | View |
10 | 06/21/2019 | Received non-substantive corrections to Appellee's brief | |
11 | 06/25/2019 | Rec'd 6 copies of AEB from Central Duplicating | |
12 | 07/02/2019 | REPLY BRIEF | View |
13 | 07/09/2019 | Rec'd 6 copies of RYB from CSD | |
14 | 08/02/2019 | ORAL ARGUMENT WAIVED - NO REQUESTS FOR ORAL ARGUMENT | |
15 | 09/03/2019 | APPEARANCES: No requests for oral argument; waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(a)(1)(c) | |
16 | 09/03/2019 | ARGUED: No requests for oral argument; waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(a)(1)(c) | |
17 | 09/12/2019 | DISPOSITION | |
18 | 09/12/2019 | UNANIMOUS OPINION : Jensen, Jon J. | View |
19 | 09/12/2019 | Costs taxed in favor of Appellant | |
20 | 09/13/2019 | Judgment Sent to Parties | |
21 | 10/08/2019 | MANDATE | |
22 | 10/22/2019 | Corrected/Substitute Opinion Page (parenthesis was added in paragraph 9 following the Moon v. Moon) |