Opinions

B.S., et al. v. Lopez-Rangel 2026 ND 70
Docket No.: 20250357
Filing Date: 3/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A district court's findings must be specifically detailed to explain the factual basis for its decision to include individuals as protected parties under domestic violence protection orders.

A district court abuses its discretion when it fails to sufficiently explain the court's rationale for the domestic violence protection order's duration.

Vormestrand v. Craig, et al. 2026 ND 69
Docket No.: 20250278
Filing Date: 3/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The district court's decision on a new trial motion is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard. A court abuses its discretion when it acts arbitrarily, unconscionably, or unreasonably, when its decision is not the product of a rational mental process leading to a reasoned determination, or when it misapplies or misinterprets the law. An abuse of discretion is never assumed; the burden is upon the party seeking relief to affirmatively establish it.

Even if evidence of domestic violence does not rise to the level triggering the rebuttable presumption against awarding perpetrating parent residential responsibility under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.2(1)(j), the evidence must be considered if it is credible.

A district court does not abuse its discretion by requiring a witness to testify from memory, without the assistance of notes, if the witness does not indicate a need for the notes, such as to refresh recollection.

Self-represented litigants are not granted relaxed judicial standards or greater judicial assistance than litigants represented by counsel.

When a dispositive motion fully resolves all pending claims, a district court need not address other pending motions that are rendered moot by that final disposition, regardless of when those motions were filed.

State v. Cooper 2026 ND 68
Docket No.: 20250134
Filing Date: 3/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An officer must administer the Miranda warning when a person is subject to custodial interrogation. A suspect is in custody when there is a formal arrest or restraint on the suspect's freedom of movement to the degree associated with
a formal arrest.

The "automobile exception" to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement allows law enforcement officers to search a vehicle for illegal contraband without a warrant upon establishing probable cause the vehicle contains contraband.

Allowing a drug-sniffing dog to sniff a vehicle is not a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. A drug-sniffing dog indicating the presence of a controlled substance establishes probable cause.

Unrelated inquiries are permitted during a stop as long as they do not prolong the stop and extend the time the individual is detained. A stop may be prolonged only if the officer has reasonable suspicion to justify detaining the individual for inquiries unrelated to the stop.

Bauer, et al. v. Adam, et al. 2026 ND 67
Docket No.: 20250249
Filing Date: 3/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Only judgments and decrees which constitute a final judgment of the rights of the parties and certain orders enumerated by statute are appealable.

For each issue, the appellant must cite to the record showing that the issue was preserved for review or state the grounds for seeking review of an issue not preserved.

Under N.D. Sup. Ct. Admin. R. 58(3)(a), the presiding judge, on the court's own motion, may designate a litigant as a vexatious litigant. Procedural safeguards are contained within N.D. Sup. Ct. Admin. R. 58 providing for a specific vexatious litigant definition, appropriate notice, requisite court findings, and the pre-filing order contents. The Court reviews an order finding a litigant vexatious for an abuse of discretion.

If an appeal is frivolous, the Court may award just damages and single or double costs, including reasonable attorney's fees.

Marschner v. Marschner 2026 ND 66
Docket No.: 20250066
Filing Date: 3/4/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Under the Uniformed Services Former Spouses' Protection Act 10, U.S.C. § 1408, as interpreted in Howell v. Howell, 581 U.S. 214 (2017), an indemnification provision requiring a veteran to compensate a former spouse for retirement pay
waived in favor of disability benefits is void and unenforceable, regardless of whether the parties agreed to it.

A district court's award of spousal support calculated to restore a former spouse's lost share of waived retirement pay is merely a semantic reframing of the prohibited division of disability pay and is preempted by federal law.

Interest of B.P. 2026 ND 65
Docket No.: 20260028
Filing Date: 3/4/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

State v. Vasquez 2026 ND 64
Docket No.: 20250314
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The district court's amended criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Bobcat of Mandan v. Doosan Bobcat North America 2026 ND 63
Docket No.: 20250327
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A two-pronged test is used when determining whether an order is appealable. First, the order appealed from must meet one of the statutory criteria of appealability set forth in N.D.C.C. § 28-27-02. If it does not, our inquiry need go no further and the appeal must be dismissed. If it does, then Rule 54(b), N.D.R.Civ.P., if applicable, must be complied with.

An "automatic stay" under N.D.C.C. § 51-07-01.1(3) is appealable under N.D.C.C. § 28-27-02(3).

The authority to issue a supervisory writ is discretionary and we decide whether to exercise our supervisory jurisdiction on a case-by-case basis.

State v. Romanyshyn 2026 ND 62
Docket No.: 20250295
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Rule 11(a)(2), N.D.R.Crim.P., addresses conditional guilty pleas and requires: (1) the defendant, any defendant's attorney, and the prosecuting attorney consent in writing to the conditional plea; (2) the court accept the conditional plea and enter an order; and (3) the judgment specify the plea is conditional.

Temporary remand is warranted for the district court to correct the judgment to conform with the requirements of N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2).

Kostelecky v. Erickson, et al. 2026 ND 61
Docket No.: 20250306
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: When exercising their discretion to impose sanctions, courts should consider the impact of the imposed sanction on innocent third parties.

While district courts retain broad authority to sanction discovery violations, that authority is necessarily constrained by the overriding obligation to consider all relevant evidence bearing on the child's best interests.

When a court imposes sanctions in a case involving residential responsibility and parenting time, the court must consider whether the sanction precludes the court from receiving evidence bearing on the child's best interests.

Under the facts of this case, the court abused its discretion by imposing an evidentiary sanction that barred a parent from presenting any evidence at a trial involving residential responsibility and parenting time.

Emme v. Emme, et al. 2026 ND 60
Docket No.: 20250277
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's divorce judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7).

Mohammed v. State 2026 ND 59
Docket No.: 20250331
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: When a court summarily dismisses an application before the State responds, the dismissal is treated as analogous to dismissal of a civil complaint under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

District courts may consider applications for postconviction relief discovered beyond the two-year statutory limitation if the petitioner alleges the existence of newly discovered evidence which would establish the petitioner did not engage
in the conduct for which petitioner was convicted.

When applications for postconviction relief assert newly discovered evidence under the exception to the statute of limitations, district courts must apply the four-prong test to determine if the evidence constitutes newly discovered evidence.

Alber v. Rodin, et al. 2026 ND 58
Docket No.: 20250182
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A losing party cannot, after a civil jury trial, raise the issues of sufficiency of the evidence or weight of the evidence for the first time on appeal.

Jury instructions are reviewed as a whole to determine if they fairly and adequately advise the jury of the law.

Inadequately briefed issues are not reviewed on appeal. Judges, whether trial or appellate, are not ferrets obligated to engage in unassisted searches of the record for evidence to support a litigant's position.

The district court has sole discretion under N.D.C.C. § 28-26-06(5), to award expert witness fees that are reasonable plus actual expenses.

Kantola v. Kantola 2026 ND 57
Docket No.: 20250407
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The district court's judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1).

When requesting more than token attorney's fees under N.D.R.App.P. 38, the prevailing party should submit documentation of the expenses incurred on the appeal. Without such documentation, the Court may consider awarding a fixed
amount.

Volker v. Nygaard, et al. 2026 ND 56
Docket No.: 20250309
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: An appeal from a district court judgment is dismissed because the appeal was untimely. The court's amended judgment inserting the amount of costs awarded in the judgment did not toll the time to appeal.

Rath v. Rath, et al. 2026 ND 55
Docket No.: 20250265
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Judgments amending parenting time and payment of child's medical expenses, and finding abusive litigation are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2)

Galpin v. Cantina Holdings, et al. 2026 ND 54
Docket No.: 20250254
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court judgment awarding an earnest money deposit to the seller and dismissing the buyers' counterclaims for declaratory judgment, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and conversion is affirmed.

Several contracts relating to the same matters between the same parties and made as parts of substantially one transaction are to be taken together. N.D.C.C. § 9-07-07.

When part of a contract is drafted under the special directions of the parties and the remainder is copied from a standard form, the specially drafted part controls over the standard form language; if the two are absolutely repugnant, the form language must be disregarded. N.D.C.C. § 9-07-16.

When a contract contains conflicting provisions, the resulting uncertainty is construed against the party who drafted the contract. N.D.C.C. § 9-07-19.

The later-in-time principle, under which inconsistent provisions in a later contract supersede those in an earlier contract, does not apply where the earlier agreement is expressly incorporated into the later one. An argument that a party breached the obligation of good faith during contractfor-deed negotiations does not affect the disposition of earnest money that had already become non-refundable before the allegedly objectionable conduct occurred.

Goetz v. Goetz, et al. 2026 ND 53
Docket No.: 20250193
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: District court did not clearly err in finding there was a material change in circumstances justifying modification of parenting time where parent with residential responsibility interfered with parenting time and was unwilling to accommodate reasonable exchange plans, the children and noncustodial parent desired to spend more time together, and the judgment contained uncertain exchange times, which caused conflict for the parties.

Under N.D.R.Ct. 8.13(a), the district court may conduct an in chambers interview of a child in a parenting time proceeding only if the parents consent.

Under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.3 and N.D.R.Ct. 8.6, the parenting investigator must file and serve her report before the evidentiary hearing, and must be available to testify at the hearing. A court abuses its discretion when it relies on the parenting investigator's report without having first provided the parties notice and an opportunity to cross-examine the parenting investigator on her report at the hearing.

Meridian Property Management v. Cordie, et al. 2026 ND 52
Docket No.: 20250344
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Landlord/Tenant
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The lack of a remedy for a statutory violation does not, in and of itself, render a statute ambiguous. Instead, it signals an intent by the legislature for the courts to apply a prejudice standard to a statutory violation.

Bedgar v. Wilson, et al. 2026 ND 51
Docket No.: 20250389
Filing Date: 2/26/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contempt of Court
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An admission of nonpayment of some, if not all, claimed obligations owed under a judgment can be enough to support a contempt finding. Remedial sanctions for contempt cannot be broader than necessary to address the specific contemptuous conduct, that is, the sanctions must be compensation for actual losses caused by the contempt or have a nexus to either compelling future compliance.

Nygaard v. Volker, et al. 2026 ND 50
Docket No.: 20250184
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A default judgment entered after the district court dismissed the answer and counterclaim as a discovery sanction is affirmed.

When a party fails to properly raise an issue or argument before the district court, it may not do so for the first time on appeal.

Rule 60(b), N.D.R.Civ.P., is the exclusive means for opening a default judgment. When a default judgment is appealed, rather than a district court's order regarding a N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion to vacate the default judgment, we review the default judgment to determine if irregularities appear on the face of the judgment.

Klebe v. Klebe 2026 ND 49
Docket No.: 20250362
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court may determine a child support obligation based on earning capacity rather than earnings history.

The presiding judge of the judicial district, not the judge sought to be disqualified, determines the validity and timeliness of a demand for change of judge under N.D.C.C. § 29-15-21. However, when a demand for change of judge is untimely filed under N.D.C.C. § 29-15-21(2), the error in having the wrong judge rule on the demand is harmless under N.D.R.Civ.P. 61.

State v. Davis 2026 ND 48
Docket No.: 20250311
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: The Court will not consider an argument under obvious error review unless the appellant briefs the issue under the obvious error standard of review.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior conviction that was an element of the charged offense.

Christianson v. Grand Forks Public School District 2026 ND 47
Docket No.: 20250329
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A party's failure to comply with the contractual requirements can waive the party's ability to enforce the contractual requirements.

A teacher's separate contract for work performed outside the regular school day, that provides separate pay and different responsibilities from the duties of their teaching contract, is extracurricular.

Adoption of K.J.K. 2026 ND 46
Docket No.: 20250252
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Adoption
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court's findings in adoption cases are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard.

A district court's denial of an adoption petition is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.

The district court found "red flags" surrounded the adoption, and finding adoption was not in K.J.K.'s best interest was not clearly erroneous.

The court did not abuse its discretion in denying the adoption petition.

State v. Medina 2026 ND 45
Docket No.: 20250178
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Art. I, § 8, of the North Dakota Constitution protect individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures.

When an individual reasonably expects privacy in an area, the government, under the Fourth Amendment, must obtain a search warrant unless the intrusion falls within a recognized exception to the warrant requirement.

One exception to the warrant requirement is the automobile exception. Under the automobile exception, law enforcement may search for illegal contraband without a warrant when probable cause exists.

Probable cause to search exists if it is established that certain identifiable objects are probably connected with criminal activity and are probably to be found at the present time at an identifiable place.

Probable cause demands not that an officer be sure or certain but only that the facts available to a reasonably cautious man would warrant a belief that certain items may be contraband or stolen property or useful as evidence of a crime.

A police officer may draw inferences based on his own experience in deciding whether probable cause exists.

Interest of M.S.H. 2026 ND 44
Docket No.: 20250421
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An appeal from an order terminating parental rights must be taken by filing a notice of expedited appeal with the clerk of the supreme court within 30 days after entry of the order. An order, which is complete, which if final, and which does not anticipate or direct further action, is appealable. Absent a timely appeal or retention of custody of the child, an order terminating parental rights may not be questioned by any person, including the petitioner, in any manner, or upon any ground.

Interest of P.S.H. 2026 ND 44
Docket No.: 20250422
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An appeal from an order terminating parental rights must be taken by filing a notice of expedited appeal with the clerk of the supreme court within 30 days after entry of the order. An order, which is complete, which if final, and which does not anticipate or direct further action, is appealable. Absent a timely appeal or retention of custody of the child, an order terminating parental rights may not be questioned by any person, including the petitioner, in any manner, or upon any ground.

Interest of W.J. 2026 ND 43
Docket No.: 20250458
Filing Date: 2/19/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Davis v. State 2026 ND 42
Docket No.: 20250319
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (7), and (8).

State v. Eggleston 2026 ND 41
Docket No.: 20250291
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted the defendant of simple assault on a correctional officer is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).

Haskell v. Grand Forks Public Schools 2026 ND 40
Docket No.: 20250275
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: An attorney at a public meeting explaining the legal position of a governing body did not waive the governing body's ability to enter an executive session.

A governing body can discuss the value requested by an adverse party without waiving the ability to discuss other adverse fiscal impacts in an executive session.

A party seeking disclosure of records withheld as exempt from open records laws does not have a due process right to participate in an in camera review or to access the records for the purpose of fully arguing why the party should have
access to them.

A district court abuses its discretion if it grants a public entity summary judgment dismissal of an open meetings violation claim without reviewing in camera the short executive session recording that the public entity claims is exempt from disclosure under the attorney consultation exemption.

State v. Reese 2026 ND 39
Docket No.: 20250161
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-02.1(1)(a), a term of imprisonment must be imposed when, in the course of committing an offense, the offender threatens another with imminent bodily injury using, or through the use or means of, a firearm.

State v. Landen 2026 ND 38
Docket No.: 20250305
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment for a terrorizing conviction is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Interest of D.G. 2026 ND 37
Docket No.: 20250432
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A juvenile court must comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act ("ICWA") in termination of parental rights proceedings where the court knows or has reason to know an Indian child is involved.

To determine whether ICWA applies in a termination of parental rights proceeding, a juvenile court must make an initial inquiry as to whether an Indian child is involved.

Interest of D.G. 2026 ND 37
Docket No.: 20250433
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A juvenile court must comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act ("ICWA") in termination of parental rights proceedings where the court knows or has reason to know an Indian child is involved.

To determine whether ICWA applies in a termination of parental rights proceeding, a juvenile court must make an initial inquiry as to whether an Indian child is involved.

Vetter v. Vetter, et al. 2026 ND 36
Docket No.: 20250339
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Arguments that are not adequately articulated, supported, and briefed on appeal are not considered and are deemed waived.

Parenting time between a parent without primary residential responsibility and a child is presumed to be in the child's best interests and that it is not merely a privilege of the parent, but a right of the child.

Parenting time should be restricted only upon a showing by a preponderance of the evidence that unrestricted parenting time is likely to endanger the child's physical or emotional health.

State v. Maher 2026 ND 35
Docket No.: 20250198
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: This Court will only vacate a district court's sentencing decision if the court acted outside statutorily prescribed limits or substantially relied on an impermissible factor.

A district court may tailor probation conditions to each case's particular facts and circumstances as long as the conditions are reasonably necessary to ensure the defendant will lead a law-abiding life or to assist the defendant to do so.

The constitutional right to parent is not without limits. Courts may impose sentences that may conflict with a parenting order when imposing such sentence serves other penological interests.

City of Dickinson v. Helgeson 2026 ND 34
Docket No.: 20250340
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The failure to display a license plate under Dickinson Municipal Code § 58-705 constituted a noncriminal violation.

The district court order did not clearly err in designating the defendant a vexatious litigant.

The required findings, filings, and notices for identification of a vexatious litigant provide sufficient procedural safeguards to prevent constitutional violations.

The citation to non-existent cases in an appellate brief is a violation of N.D.R.App.P. 28(l), which exposes the filing party to the imposition of sanctions for their misconduct.

Rent Daddy's v. Gamel, et al. 2026 ND 33
Docket No.: 20250408
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Eviction
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The district court's eviction judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (7) and (8).

Interest of S.M. 2026 ND 32
Docket No.: 20260006
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The juvenile court's order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Rousseau v. Armstrong, et al. 2026 ND 31
Docket No.: 20250336
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Injunction
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A party does not have a right to appeal if there is no final judgment or order under N.D.C.C. § 28-27-01. A dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction is presumed to be without prejudice.

State v. Eggleston 2026 ND 30
Docket No.: 20250292
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: To establish a due process violation based on pre-indictment delay, a defendant must demonstrate actual prejudice. Similarly, to establish a due process violation based upon the State's failure to preserve evidence, a defendant must demonstrate actual prejudice. When the State fails to preserve evidence that was at one point in the State's possession, a defendant must also present evidence of bad faith, meaning the State deliberately destroyed evidence with the intent to deprive the defense of information. Mere speculation that unpreserved evidence might have been exculpatory is not enough to show actual prejudice.

Kingstone v. Tedrow Kingstone 2026 ND 29
Docket No.: 20250346
Filing Date: 2/12/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court can deviate upward from the presumptive child support guideline amount if it is in the best interest of a child and one or more of the enumerated criteria under N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-09(2) is met. A district court's findings explaining why an upward deviation is in the best interest of a child, and explaining the amount of an upward deviation, are explicit enough if the Court is able to understand from them the factual basis for the district court's determination.

The mandate rule does not permit a party to relitigate issues which were resolved in a first appeal, and requires a district court to follow the pronouncements of an appellate court within the limits of a remand.

Interest of J.C. 2026 ND 28
Docket No.: 20250378
Filing Date: 2/5/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Interest of S.C.Y. 2026 ND 28
Docket No.: 20250379
Filing Date: 2/5/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Interest of M.M. 2026 ND 27
Docket No.: 20250430
Filing Date: 2/5/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Fargo Maple View v. Lofthus, et al. 2026 ND 26
Docket No.: 20250282
Filing Date: 2/5/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Debtor/Creditor
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's order denying a motion to change venue is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Garaas, et al. v. NDIC, et al. 2026 ND 25
Docket No.: 20250109
Filing Date: 2/5/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Industrial Commission
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: NDIC is a creature of statute and only has the authority expressly granted by the legislature or necessarily implied from the legislature's express grant of authority. Section 38-08-04(1)(c), N.D.C.C., provides NDIC authority to allocate oil and gas production from an overlapping spacing unit to an underlying base spacing unit.

NDIC failed to regularly pursue its authority when issuing the order allocating oil and gas production from an overlapping spacing unit to an underlying base spacing unit because it failed to modify the existing pooling orders under N.D.C.C. § 38-08-07, and failed to follow statutory procedures.

An NDIC order allocating oil and gas production from an overlapping spacing unit to an underlying base spacing unit is vacated.

Holzworth v. Ortega Rivera, et al. 2026 ND 24
Docket No.: 20250293
Filing Date: 2/5/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment awarding joint and equal residential responsibility of a minor child is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).