Mead v. Hatzenbeller
Docket Info
- Title
- Carey Mead, Petitioner and Appellee
v.
Mark Robert Hatzenbeller, Respondent and Appellant - Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : OTHER (Civil)
- Appeal From
-
Case No. 2023-CV-01291
East Central Judicial District, Cass County
Constance L. Cleveland
Highlight
A temporary restraining order is a type of injunction that is brief in duration and meant to maintain the status quo until the district court can make a determination on the merits of a petition. After a final order has been issued, questions concerning the propriety of earlier temporary injunctive orders are moot.
Disorderly conduct is analyzed in the same manner for both civil and criminal cases because the reasonable grounds for a restraining order are synonymous with probable cause for an arrest. The elements of criminal disorderly conduct by harassment are the same as those required to prove disorderly conduct in the context of a petition for a restraining order.
A petitioner for a disorderly conduct restraining order must prove his case before the district court in a full hearing. Because a restraining order constrains a person’s liberty and entails certain stigma, a respondent has a due process right to a fair hearing, including reasonable notice or opportunity to know of the claims of opposing parties, along with the opportunity to rebut those claims.
The purpose of an appeal is to review the actions of the trial court, not to grant the appellant an opportunity to develop and expound upon new strategies or theories. Issues or contentions not raised in the district court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
Seq. # | Filing Date | Description | Attachment |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 06/07/2023 | NOTICE OF APPEAL : 06/07/2023 | View |
2 | 06/07/2023 | ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 06/20/2023 | View |
3 | 06/20/2023 | Rec'd filing fee | |
4 | 06/20/2023 | NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV. | View |
5 | 06/20/2023 | Notice Served on Tatum O'Brien, Sara Monson, Madison D. Marchus & Joel M. Fremstad | |
6 | 07/11/2023 | ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JULY 10, 2023 (ENTRY NOS. 1-23) | View |
7 | 07/19/2023 | All Transcripts Filed in Record | |
8 | 08/28/2023 | APPELLANT BRIEF | View |
9 | 08/28/2023 | Oral Argument Request by Appellant | |
10 | 08/29/2023 | Rec'd 3 copies of ATB from CSD | |
11 | 09/26/2023 | APPELLEE BRIEF | View |
12 | 09/29/2023 | Rec'd 3 copies of AEB from CSD | |
13 | 10/10/2023 | NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT | |
14 | 10/25/2023 | MOTION TO CONDUCT ORAL ARGUMENT BY RELIABLE ELECTRONIC MEANS | View |
15 | 10/26/2023 | Response Filed | View |
16 | 10/27/2023 | ACTION BY SUPREME COURT - Denied | |
17 | 11/02/2023 | APPEARANCES: Madison D. Marchus, Appellee waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(a)(1)(C) | |
18 | 11/02/2023 | ARGUED: Madison D. Marchus, Appellee waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(a)(1)(C) | |
19 | 11/02/2023 | ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | |
20 | 12/28/2023 | DISPOSITION | |
21 | 12/28/2023 | UNANIMOUS OPINION : Crothers, Daniel John | View |
22 | 12/28/2023 | Judgment | View |
23 | 12/28/2023 | Costs taxed in favor of Appellee | |
24 | 01/19/2024 | MANDATE |