Hagen v. North Dakota Insurance Reserve Fund
Docket Info
- Title
- Lance Hagen, Petitioner, Appellee, and Cross-Appellant
v.
North Dakota Insurance Reserve Fund, Respondent, Appellant, and Cross-Appellee - Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : WRIT OF MANDAMUS (Civil)
- Appeal From
-
Case No. 2019-CV-03559
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
John W. Grinsteiner
Highlight
Courts have broad discretion when deciding whether to grant leave to amend a complaint. Amendments correcting technical deficiencies relate back to the date of the original pleading.
Agencies of political subdivisions are public entities subject to the open records law. “Agencies” refers to a relationship created by law or contract whereby one party delegates the transaction of some lawful business to another.
Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, all records of a public entity are public records. The plain meaning of “provided by law” does not operate to create additional open records exemptions arising from court rules defining privileges and discovery limitations. Rule 502, N.D.R.Ev., is an evidentiary rule applicable to court proceedings, and does not create a specific exception to the open records law. Under N.D.R.Ev. 502(d)(7), there generally is no attorney-client privilege as to a communication between a public officer or agency and its lawyers.
A public entity’s attorney work product must be made available for public disclosure following completion of litigation, unless disclosure would have an adverse fiscal effect on the conduct or settlement of other pending or reasonably predictable civil or criminal litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings, or the attorney work product reflects mental impressions, opinions, conclusions, or legal theories regarding potential liability of a public entity. If the potential for liability is entirely in the past, the record is no longer exempt. Only if the records relate to circumstances for which there remains a genuine potential for liability may the records remain exempt.
Under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.2(1), awarding costs and attorney’s fees is discretionary and a court’s decision will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
Seq. # | Filing Date | Description | Attachment |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 04/09/2021 | NOTICE OF APPEAL : 04/09/2021 | |
2 | 04/09/2021 | ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 04/12/2021 | |
3 | 04/12/2021 | Rec'd $125.00 Filing Fee | |
4 | 04/12/2021 | NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV. | |
5 | 04/12/2021 | Notice Served on Kristen Tuntland & Zachary E. Pelham and Paul R. Sanderson | |
6 | 05/06/2021 | ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MAY 5, 2021 (ENTRY NOS.1-113 ) | |
7 | 05/06/2021 | NOTICE OF CROSS APPEAL | |
8 | 05/06/2021 | NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF CROSS-APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV. | |
9 | 05/06/2021 | Notice Served on Kristen Tuntland & Zachary E. Pelham and Paul R. Sanderson | |
10 | 06/02/2021 | ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JUNE 1, 2021 (ENTRY NOS. 1-118) | |
11 | 06/11/2021 | ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED JULY 21, 2020 | |
12 | 06/11/2021 | TRANSCRIPT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE | |
13 | 07/09/2021 | MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD | |
14 | 07/12/2021 | ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE - Denied | |
15 | 07/12/2021 | MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF | |
16 | 07/13/2021 | ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 08/04/2021 | |
17 | 08/04/2021 | APPELLANT BRIEF | View |
18 | 08/04/2021 | APPELLANT APPENDIX | |
19 | 08/04/2021 | Oral Argument Request by Appellant | |
20 | 08/06/2021 | Rec'd non-substantive corrections to ATA (pg numbering) | |
21 | 08/09/2021 | Rec'd 4 copies of ATB & 3 copies of ATA from CSD | |
22 | 09/03/2021 | APPELLEE BRIEF | View |
23 | 09/09/2021 | Rec'd 4 copies of AEB back from CD | |
24 | 09/17/2021 | REPLY BRIEF | View |
25 | 10/01/2021 | REPLY BRIEF OF CROSS-APPELLANT LANCE HAGEN | View |
26 | 10/05/2021 | Rec'd 4 copies of Appellant RYB | |
27 | 10/05/2021 | Rec'd 4 copies of Cross-Appellant RYB | |
28 | 10/19/2021 | NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT | |
29 | 11/30/2021 | APPEARANCES: Kristen Tuntland & Zachary E. Pelham/Paul R. Sanderson | |
30 | 11/30/2021 | ARGUED: Zachary E. Pelham/Paul R. Sanderson | |
31 | 11/30/2021 | ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | |
32 | 03/17/2022 | DISPOSITION (AND REMANDED) | |
33 | 03/17/2022 | SPLIT OPINION : Tufte, Jerod E. | View |
34 | 03/17/2022 | CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART : Crothers, Daniel John | |
35 | 03/17/2022 | CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART : McEvers, Lisa K. Fair | |
36 | 03/17/2022 | Costs on Appeal taxed in favor of Appellee | |
37 | 03/17/2022 | Judgment | View |
38 | 04/08/2022 | MANDATE | |
39 | 05/23/2022 | Corrected/Substitute Opinion Page (pg 9, para 23, line 7 comma removed after 44-04-17.1) | |
40 | 05/23/2022 | (pg 14, para 33, line 9, comma "," inserted after the word "opinion")(pg 14, para 34, a "§" was | |
41 | 05/23/2022 | added after "N.D.C.C." to read "N.D.C.C. § 44-04-17.1(13)(b)." (pg 15, para 38, line 2, a "§" | |
42 | 05/23/2022 | was added behind "N.D.C.C." to read "N.D.C.C. § 44-04-17.1(13)(b)." |