Arthaud v. Fuglie
- Jim Arthaud, Plaintiff and Appellant
Jim Fuglie, Defendant and Appellee
- Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : OTHER (Civil)
- Appeal From
Case No. 2021-CV-01885
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
Cynthia M. Feland
Parties' Statement of Issues
[¶ 1] Whether the district court erred when it held that the discovery rule only tolls the statute of limitations for defamation claims that are based on “inherently undiscoverable” statements.
[¶ 2] Whether the district court erred when it held that Fuglie’s defamatory statements were inherently discoverable.
The issues in this case are whether the discovery rule applies to defamation claims, and if so, whether Arthaud’s claim is nevertheless time barred.
Jim Arthaud appeals a district court judgment granting Jim Fuglie’s motion to dismiss.
Arthaud sued Fuglie on October 5, 2021, alleging Fuglie published a false and defamatory blog article on the internet on August 2, 2018. Fuglie argued Arthaud’s claim was barred under the applicable statute of limitations. Fuglie subsequently filed a N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the claim. The district court held a hearing on the motion and determined Arthaud’s claim was barred under the applicable statute of limitations.
On appeal, Arthaud argues the discovery rule tolls the statute of limitations and Fuglie’s defamatory statement was not inherently discoverable.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||08/15/2022||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 08/15/2022||View|
|2||08/15/2022||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 08/16/2022|
|3||08/16/2022||NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.||View|
|4||08/16/2022||Notice Served on Lawrence Bender, Mark W. Vyvyan & Spencer D. Ptacek & Charles T. Edin|
|5||09/07/2022||ANNOUNCED DISQUALIFICATION : Crothers, Daniel John|
|6||09/06/2022||All Transcripts Filed in Record|
|7||09/08/2022||UPDATED NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.||View|
|8||09/08/2022||Notice on Appeal Served on Lawrence Bender, Mark W. Vyvyan & Spencer D. Ptacek and|
|9||09/08/2022||Chris A. Edison & Katie L. Winbauer (Incorrect counsel was previously served)|
|10||09/13/2022||ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED SEPTEMBER 12, 2022 (ENTRY NOS.1-51)||View|
|12||10/14/2022||Oral Argument Request by Appellant|
|13||10/20/2022||Rec'd corrections to ATB (table of auth)|
|14||10/21/2022||Rec'd proof of service of corrections|
|15||10/25/2022||Rec'd 3 copies of ATB from CSD|
|17||11/14/2022||Oral Argument Request by Appellee|
|18||11/17/2022||Rec'd 3 copies of AEB back from CD|
|19||11/23/2022||NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|20||11/23/2022||NOTICE OF RESCHEDULED ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|21||11/28/2022||SITTING WITH THE COURT : Clark, Cherie LaVonne|
|23||11/30/2022||Rec'd 3 copies of RYB back from CSD|
|24||12/19/2022||APPEARANCES: Lawrence Bender/Mark W. Vyvyan/Chris A. Edison/Katie L. Winbauer|
|25||12/19/2022||ARGUED: Mark W. Vyvyan/Chris A. Edison|
|26||12/19/2022||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|