Opinions
On this page, you can search and view the Supreme Court’s opinions. If you wish to review the docket or documents filed in a matter, please go to the Court’s public portal search page.
1 - 10 of 12118 results
|
Myrick, et al. v. Holmes
2025 ND 225 Highlight: An appeal from a disorderly conduct restraining order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8). |
|
State v. Hamilton
2025 ND 224 Highlight: The district court's order removing a condition from the defendant's criminal judgment that required money from his prison account to be applied to his child support obligations is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
State v. Gaede
2025 ND 223 Highlight: An order denying a North Dakota Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence is summarily affirmed under North Dakota Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.1(a)(7). |
|
State v. Jaeger
2025 ND 222
Highlight: Pursuant to N.D.R.Crim.P. 36, a district court has authority to correct a clerical error in a written order that inaccurately states the court's oral pronouncement of sentence when the correction does not make the sentence more onerous than |
|
Thornberg v. Thornberg, et al.
2025 ND 221
Highlight: The district court's order holding the appellant in contempt of court for interfering with the appellee's parenting time is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Matter of William C. Hansen and Verna Hansen Trust
2025 ND 220 Highlight: North Dakota Century Code § 59-14-02(5) governs whether an agent acting under a power of attorney has authority to amend a trust. It permits amendments "only to the extent expressly authorized by the terms of the trust or the power, exercised in writing and delivered to the trustee." Under N.D.C.C. § 59-19-02(1)(b), the express authorization requirement applies "to all judicial proceedings concerning trusts which are commenced after July 31, 2007." The word "express" means clearly and unmistakably communicated; stated with directness and clarity. Express authority cannot be implied from general provisions. |
|
Dukart, et al. v. Holmes
2025 ND 219 Highlight: A disorderly conduct restraining order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8). |
|
Mollner v. State
2025 ND 218 Highlight: An order denying relief in a postconviction proceeding is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Interest of J.C.
2025 ND 217 Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is remanded for specified findings of active efforts under N.D.C.C. § 27-19.7-01(2). The Supreme Court retains jurisdiction. |
|
Interest of S.C.Y.
2025 ND 217 Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is remanded for specified findings of active efforts under N.D.C.C. § 27-19.7-01(2). The Supreme Court retains jurisdiction. |