Christiansen v. NDDOT
- Kendra M. Christiansen, Appellant
William T. Panos, Director,
Department of Transportation, Appellee
- Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : TRANSPORTATION DEPT.
- Appeal From
Case No. 2021-CV-01432
East Central Judicial District, Cass County
Wade L. Webb
The Administrative Agencies Practice Act governs this Court’s review of the Department of Transportation’s decision to suspend a driver’s license.
Chapter 1-02, N.D.C.C., contains the traditional rules of statutory construction and interpretation.
Section 39-20-03.1, N.D.C.C., provides procedures law enforcement must follow after a person has tested over the legal limit for driving under the influence.
Section 39-20-04.1, N.D.C.C., provides the Department of Transportation’s authority to sanction a driver who has tested over the legal limit for driving under the influence.
Section 39-20-04.1(1), N.D.C.C., does not mention the timing of law enforcement forwarding the report, so the five-day directive to law enforcement in N.D.C.C. 39-20-03.1(4) does not affect the Department’s authority to suspend driving privileges.
When no remedy is provided by statute for a statutory violation, this Court looks at whether the victim of the violation was prejudiced.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||08/02/2021||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 08/02/2021|
|2||08/04/2021||Rec'd $125 Filing Fee|
|3||08/05/2021||NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.|
|4||08/05/2021||Notice served on Mark A. Friese, Danny L. Herbel & Michael T. Pitcher|
|5||08/05/2021||ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING TRANSCRIPT DATED APRIL 26, 2021|
|6||09/02/2021||ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED SEPTEMBER 1, 2021 (ENTRY NOS.1-25 AND 27-55) REC'D VIA|
|7||09/02/2021||U.S. MAIL ENTRY NO. 26 (EXHIBIT 17 - DVD)|
|9||09/08/2021||Oral Argument Request by Appellant|
|11||09/09/2021||Rec'd correction to ATA (notice of appeal & specification of error) & proof of service|
|12||09/13/2021||Rec'd copies of ATB & ATA from Central Duplicating|
|14||10/07/2021||Oral Argument Request by Appellee|
|15||10/11/2021||Rec'd copies of AEB from Central Duplicating|
|16||10/19/2021||NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|17||11/30/2021||APPEARANCES: Mark A. Friese/Michael T. Pitcher|
|18||11/30/2021||ARGUED: Mark A. Friese/Michael T. Pitcher|
|19||11/30/2021||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|21||01/27/2022||UNANIMOUS OPINION : Crothers, Daniel John||View|
|23||01/27/2022||Costs taxed in favor of Appellee|
|24||02/07/2022||PETITION FOR REHEARING||View|
|25||02/07/2022||Rec'd non-substantive corrections to PER (Page numbering)|
|26||02/09/2022||Rec'd copies of PER from Central Duplicating|
|27||02/17/2022||ACTION BY SUPREME COURT - Denied||View|
|29||03/04/2022||RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|