Opinions

Anne Carlsen Center v. LeFevre, et al. 2025 ND 142
Docket No.: 20250168
Filing Date: 7/31/2025
Case Type: Original Proceeding - Civil - Writ of Supervision
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A petition for supervisory writ is granted.

In ruling on a motion to compel, the district court must state the reasons for its conclusions with sufficient specificity to afford a clear understanding of its decision and allow for meaningful review.

The withholding party's burden to prove an asserted privilege or protection applies presumes a burden to submit the disputed documents for in-camera review in a form that is readily intelligible to the district court. If the district court is unable to discern the content of a document, it may require the withholding party to assist the court, including by providing a readable copy.

Section 50-25.1-11, N.D.C.C., designates as confidential a "report made under this chapter, as well as any other information obtained." Although "report made" and "information obtained" lack a subject, in context it is clear that the statute refers to reports made to the Department of Health and Human Services. Even if information in a document is later included in a report subject to N.D.C.C. ch. 50-25.1, it is the report and the other information obtained by the Department in association with that report that is confidential.

Documents do not become confidential or privileged by attaching them to a confidential report or privileged email. The lawyer-client privilege protects confidential communications themselves and not necessarily the facts underlying the communications.

A party asserting work-product privilege may not rely on "in anticipation of litigation" as magic words that automatically protect a disputed document from disclosure. The inchoate possibility, or even the likely chance of litigation, does not give rise to work product. To justify work product protection, the threat of litigation must be real and imminent.

Tamm v. Gatzke, et al. 2025 ND 141
Docket No.: 20250062
Filing Date: 7/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An easement implied from pre-existing use requires unity of title of the dominant and servient tenement and a subsequent severance; apparent, permanent, and continuous use; and, the easement must be important or necessary for the enjoyment of the dominant tenement.

An easement by necessity arises where there is a conveyance of a part of a tract of land of such nature and extent that either the part conveyed or the part retained is shut off from access to a road to the outer world by the land from which it is severed or by this land and the land of strangers.

A motion for judgment on the pleadings should not be granted unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.

A motion for summary judgment is not an opportunity to conduct a mini-trial, and summary judgment is inappropriate if the court must draw inferences and make findings on disputed facts to support the judgment.

A party seeking an implied easement has the burden of proving the existence of the easement by clear and convincing evidence.

Interest of A.W. 2025 ND 140
Docket No.: 20250141
Filing Date: 7/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An aggrieved party, including the state or a subdivision of the state, may appeal from a final order, judgment, or decree of the juvenile court to the supreme court by filing written notice of appeal within thirty days after entry of the order, judgment, or decree, or within any further time the supreme court grants, after entry of the order, judgment, or decree.

Interlocutory orders are appealable if it is deemed to be an appeal from a subsequently entered consistent final order or judgment.

The party requesting review of the findings and order of a judicial referee by a district court judge must give notice to all other parties. If a party is represented by counsel, all documents filed with the court must be signed by the attorney of record.

Issues not briefed on appeal are waived.

Juliuson v. Johnson, et al. 2025 ND 139
Docket No.: 20240338
Filing Date: 7/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Issues not briefed are deemed abandoned.

A district court's decision on a motion under N.D.R.Civ.P. 50 to deny or grant judgment as a matter of law is based upon whether the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made, leads to but one conclusion as to the verdict about which there can be no reasonable difference of opinion.

A district court's decision on a motion for judgment as a matter of law is fully reviewable on appeal.

The doctrine of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is limited to the insured-insurer relationship.

A breach of contract, even if intentional, malicious, or in bad faith, does not give rise to a breach of contract claim or turn a breach of contract claim into a tort claim absent proof of independent tortious conduct.

State v. Erickstad 2025 ND 138
Docket No.: 20240300
Filing Date: 7/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court shall correct an illegal sentence at any time with notice.

A district court must provide notice to all parties before amending a sentence under N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(a)(2).

Rademacher v. State 2025 ND 137
Docket No.: 20250023
Filing Date: 7/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Issues not raised in an application for postconviction relief cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.

"Fitness to proceed" and "lack of criminal responsibility" are separate and distinct concepts. The process for an examination or evaluation for fitness to proceed and lack of criminal responsibility differ.

Rule 52(a), N.D.R.Civ.P., requires, "In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury . . . the [district] court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law."

A petitioner in a postconviction relief proceeding carries a heavy burden to establish a reasonable probability that, but for trial counsel's error, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Generally, a petitioner must provide more than conclusory allegations to meet that burden.

Liquid Hospitality v. Bd. of City Commissioners of the City of Fargo 2025 ND 136
Docket No.: 20240347
Filing Date: 7/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Other
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court erred in finding Fargo Municipal Code § 25-1509.2 to be unconstitutionally vague.

Axvig, et al. v. Czajkowski, et al. 2025 ND 135
Docket No.: 20250004
Filing Date: 7/17/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court misinterpreted a contract for deed by allowing a party to proceed with a cancellation action without first providing the other party notice of the default and time to cure the default as required by the contract.

A remedy is the appropriate legal form of relief by which that remediable right ay be enforced. It is the form of relief by which the right is enforced and is not part of the cause of action.

Cancellation of the contract for deed is one remedy, which may be achieved by alternative methods: 1) a statutory cancellation under N.D.C.C. ch. 32-18; or 2) a court action.

Cancellation of a contract for deed by action is an action in equity, and the court must base its decision on equitable principles. In the absence of express terms specifying notice and redemption, an action for cancellation has a presumption that notice and redemption are appropriate and require specific findings weighing the equity of a notice and redemption period.

State v. Berkley 2025 ND 134
Docket No.: 20240351
Filing Date: 7/17/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Child Abuse/Child Neglect
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: We interpret statutes to give meaning and effect to every word, phrase, and sentence, and do not adopt a construction which would render part of the statute mere surplusage. Our primary goal when interpreting statutes is to determine the Legislature's intended meaning.

If, after applying our statutory and doctrinal canons, the plain or ordinary language suggests two plausible and rational meanings, then the statute is ambiguous. When a statute is ambiguous, we may consider extrinsic aids, including legislative history, along with the language of the statute, to understand the Legislature's intended meaning.

Section 12.1-32-15(2), N.D.C.C., allows the court to deviate from the registration for "crimes against children" if the court first finds the individual has not previously been convicted as a sexual offender or for a crime against a child, and the individual did not exhibit mental abnormality or predatory conduct in the commission of the offense, unless the offense is described in section 12.1-29-02, or the offense is described in section 12.1-18-01 or 12.1-18-02 and the person is not the parent of the victim. The phrase "and the person is not the parent of the victim" applies to section 12.1-18-01 and 12.1-18-02, but not section 12.1-29-02.

State v. Solomon 2025 ND 133
Docket No.: 20250021
Filing Date: 7/17/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Under the speedy trial statute, trials must begin within 90 days of invoking this right, unless the court finds "good cause" for delay. Courts consider four factors when determining good cause: (1) length of delay, (2) reason for delay, (3) whether the defendant asserted the right, and (4) prejudice to the defendant.

Even if a district court doesn't explicitly discuss these factors, we will uphold the court's decision if applying the factors would reach the same result.

It is unnecessary to seek judicial notice of matters outside the record to rebut allegations contrary to the existing record.

WSI v. Boechler, et al. 2025 ND 132
Docket No.: 20240165
Filing Date: 7/17/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Under N.D.C.C. § 65-04-26.1, a president of a corporation is not personally liable for penalties imposed due to a failure to file payroll reports.

North Dakota Century Code § 65-04-26.1(3) requires Workforce Safety and Insurance to make an administrative determination regarding personal liability. A decision regarding personal liability under N.D.C.C. § 65-04-26.1 applies prospectively thus establishing personal liability for future sums owed by the corporation.

Bang, et al. v. Continental Resources 2025 ND 131
Docket No.: 20240239
Filing Date: 7/17/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Under a usual oil and gas lease, the lessee, in developing the leased premises, is entitled to use of the land reasonably necessary in producing the oil. Even though the surface rights of the lessee may arise by implication, it is important to note that lessee's rights are primarily governed by the specific grant of rights in the lease.

A district court has broad discretion in admitting or excluding evidence at trial, which will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.

An appellate court's conclusion a trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting certain evidence in one case does not mean another trial court abused its discretion by not admitting similar evidence in a different case.

The district court has discretion to determine an appropriate sanction for a party's failure to supplement interrogatories and may exclude expert testimony that is beyond the scope of a party's responses to interrogatories.

The district court is not required to give instructions in the specific language requested by a party if the instructions given fairly and adequately inform the jury of the law.

State v. Kennedy 2025 ND 130
Docket No.: 20240346
Filing Date: 7/17/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A party can invite error during voir dire.

It is the responsibility of the parties, not the district court, to object to evidence a party believes is inadmissible.

A party may intentionally not object to potentially inadmissible evidence for numerous strategic reasons. The court ruling on the admissibility of evidence when not invited to by a party can disrupt a party's trial presentation and sabotage a party's trial strategy.

Attorneys have an obligation to ensure that the arguments they present are factually and legally supported.

Whether to substitute appointed counsel is committed to the sound discretion of the district court.

Carvalho v. Carvalho, et al. 2025 ND 129
Docket No.: 20250086
Filing Date: 7/17/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court must perform an adequate analysis for an appellate court to determine the basis for its decision.

Whether a party has established a prima facie case for a change of primary residential responsibility is a question of law which we review de novo.

Bazile v. State 2025 ND 128
Docket No.: 20250015
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court order denying an amended application for postconviction relief is affirmed.

An application for postconviction relief based on newly discovered evidence under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(1)(e) is reviewed as a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence under N.D.R.Crim.P. 33.

Section § 29-32.1-01 ("Remedy - To whom available - Conditions) limits the availability of postconviction relief to those grounds listed under subsection 1. An applicant for postconviction relief under N.D.C.C. ch. 29-32.1 must base his application on the grounds provided under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(1).

Res judicata bars relitigation of the same claim or claims that were fully and finally determined in a previous proceeding.

Interest of B.F. 2025 ND 127
Docket No.: 20250159
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: An appeal from a juvenile court order terminating parental rights is affirmed.

A factfinder may rely in its findings on an affidavit if the affidavit is properly offered and received into the evidentiary record.

Termination of parental rights proceedings under N.D.C.C. ch. 27-20.3 are governed by the North Dakota Rules of Juvenile Procedure and, to the extent they are not inconsistent with the Rules of Juvenile Procedure, the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure.

N.D.R.Juv.P. 16 applies to motions to vacate in termination of parental rights proceedings under N.D.C.C. ch. 27-20.3.

Rule 16, N.D.R.Juv.P., provides for both mandatory and discretionary modification of orders. A court's exercise of its discretion under N.D.R.Juv.P. 16(b) is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.

A court's discretion to modify orders under N.D.R.Juv.P. 16(b) is narrow when the order at issue is an order terminating parental rights. Under N.D.R.Juv.P. 16(b)(2), a court may only vacate an order terminating parental rights on motion of the parent if the child is not placed for adoption and the person having custody of the child consents in writing to the vacation of the decree.

When a parent fails to appear at a proceeding under N.D.C.C. ch. 27-20.3, a juvenile court does not violate the parent's constitutional due process rights if it exercises its discretion to proceed under N.D.R.Juv.P. 10.

Interest of I.F. 2025 ND 127
Docket No.: 20250160
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: An appeal from a juvenile court order terminating parental rights is affirmed.

A factfinder may rely in its findings on an affidavit if the affidavit is properly offered and received into the evidentiary record.

Termination of parental rights proceedings under N.D.C.C. ch. 27-20.3 are governed by the North Dakota Rules of Juvenile Procedure and, to the extent they are not inconsistent with the Rules of Juvenile Procedure, the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure.

N.D.R.Juv.P. 16 applies to motions to vacate in termination of parental rights proceedings under N.D.C.C. ch. 27-20.3.

Rule 16, N.D.R.Juv.P., provides for both mandatory and discretionary modification of orders. A court's exercise of its discretion under N.D.R.Juv.P. 16(b) is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.

A court's discretion to modify orders under N.D.R.Juv.P. 16(b) is narrow when the order at issue is an order terminating parental rights. Under N.D.R.Juv.P. 16(b)(2), a court may only vacate an order terminating parental rights on motion of the parent if the child is not placed for adoption and the person having custody of the child consents in writing to the vacation of the decree.

When a parent fails to appear at a proceeding under N.D.C.C. ch. 27-20.3, a juvenile court does not violate the parent's constitutional due process rights if it exercises its discretion to proceed under N.D.R.Juv.P. 10.

Equinor Energy v. NDIC, et al. 2025 ND 126
Docket No.: 20240357
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Industrial Commission
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: An order of the North Dakota Industrial Commission is vacated for lack of jurisdiction.

Adjudicatory jurisdiction does not necessarily inhere in an agency's regulatory jurisdiction. A public administrative body has such adjudicatory jurisdiction as is conferred on it by statute. The jurisdiction of an administrative agency is dependent upon the terms of the statute.

Section 38-08-04, N.D.C.C., grants the Commission broad regulatory jurisdiction over disposal of saltwater, but it does not expressly or by necessary implication grant jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes arising under contracts relating to saltwater disposal.

The "costs" of "operation of a well on a spacing unit" under N.D.C.C. § 38-08-08(2) include production costs but exclude post-production costs. The Commission's jurisdiction to determine proper costs under § 38-08-08(2) thus extends only to production costs and excludes post-production costs.

Salt-water gathering is a post-production cost outside of the Commission's jurisdiction under N.D.C.C. § 38-08-08(2), and the Commission thus lacks jurisdiction under N.D.C.C. § 38-08-08(2) to adjudicate disputes between private parties over saltwater gathering costs.

Gomez v. State 2025 ND 125
Docket No.: 20250058
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An application for post-conviction relief must be filed within two years of the date the conviction becomes final.

An application for postconviction relief may be summarily dismissed if commenced outside the two-year period for filing and does not meet an exception under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(3).

Matter of Quilt 2025 ND 124
Docket No.: 20240360
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court's order granting a continuance to allow a witness to appear by reliable electronic means was affirmed.

Interest of Wedmore 2025 ND 123
Docket No.: 20240303
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court's order granting a motion for a witness to appear by electronic means is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

A district court's order finding an individual qualifies as a sexually dangerous individual must contain findings that the individual has a serious difficulty controlling their behavior.

Fagnon v. Ngaima 2025 ND 122
Docket No.: 20250074
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A district court may grant a disorderly conduct restraining order when a petitioner shows there are reasonable grounds to believe that the respondent has engaged in disorderly conduct. Disorderly conduct means intrusive or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another person.

A district court's findings of fact must be sufficient to enable an appellate court to understand the factual determinations made by the district court and the basis for its conclusions of law. The district court's findings are adequate if the appellate court can discern from them the factual basis for the district court's decision.

There must be logical limits on the time and distance factors when a restraining order is at issue.

Toppenberg v. Toppenberg, et al. 2025 ND 121
Docket No.: 20250017
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: According to N.D.C.C. § 14-09-08.4(4) and N.D. Admin. Code. § 75-0204.1-07(7), party seeking modification of a child support order that was entered at least one year before the filing of the motion has the burden of proving that the existing level of support does not conform to the guidelines and that the change in employment was not made for the purpose of reducing the obligor's child support obligation.

A proper finding of net income is essential to determine the correct amount of child support under the child support guidelines. Net income is the total gross annual income less certain amounts available for deduction under N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-01(6). Gross income is defined as "income from any source, in any form," except for some specific exclusions under N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-01(4)(a).

Sanda v. Sanda 2025 ND 120
Docket No.: 20240352
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: When a divorce is granted, the district court shall make an equitable distribution of the property and debts of the parties. All property held by the parties, whether it is held individually or jointly, is deemed marital property, and the court must determine the property's total value before making an equitable distribution. This includes separate property, or property exempt from being included as marital property, that has been commingled or placed into a joint bank account.

If the parties do not mutually agree upon a valuation date, the valuation date for marital property and debt is sixty days before the initially scheduled trial date. If there is a substantial change in value of an asset or debt between the date of valuation and the date of trial, the district court may adjust the valuation of that asset or debt as necessary to effect an equitable distribution and shall make specific findings that another date of valuation is fair and equitable.

A property distribution does not need to be equal to be equitable, but the district court must explain a substantial disparity. The property's origin may be considered when equitably dividing the estate, along with economic fault and dissipation of assets.

A premarital agreement is a contract that is interpreted in a manner that gives effect to the parties' mutual intent at the time of contracting, usually in relation to the disposition of property upon divorce.

We do not reweigh conflicts in the evidence, and we give due regard to the district court's opportunity to judge the credibility of the witnesses.

Interest of J.O. 2025 ND 119
Docket No.: 20250036
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court judgment finding the children are in need of protection is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of L.O. 2025 ND 119
Docket No.: 20250037
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court judgment finding the children are in need of protection is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of A.O. 2025 ND 119
Docket No.: 20250038
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court judgment finding the children are in need of protection is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of A.O. 2025 ND 119
Docket No.: 20250039
Filing Date: 7/3/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court judgment finding the children are in need of protection is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Reciprocal Discipline of Odegaard 2025 ND 118
Docket No.: 20250115
Filing Date: 6/18/2025
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Reciprocal
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Lawyer disbarred

Anderson v. Anderson 2025 ND 117
Docket No.: 20240343
Filing Date: 6/18/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A divorce judgment entered after a bench trial is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Roth, et al. v. Meyer, et al. 2025 ND 116
Docket No.: 20240324
Filing Date: 6/18/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: The mandate rule, a more specific application of law of the case, requires the trial court to follow pronouncements of an appellate court on legal issues in subsequent proceedings and to carry the appellate court's mandate into effect according to its terms.

When a finding requires proof by clear and convincing evidence in the trial court, our review on appeal applies the clearly erroneous standard under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a) in the context of the required standard of proof.

The burden of proving adverse possession rests with the person alleging it and must be established by clear and convincing evidence. Beyond the elevated burden of clear and convincing evidence, "special rigor" is required to prove adverse possession against a family member.

Adverse possession requires possession hostile to the true owner—meaning possession that is inconsistent with the owner's rights and gives notice of adverse claims.

For purposes of establishing adverse possession, a claimant's subjective belief he owned the property is not relevant.

Because the notice requirement is a fundamental part of an adverse possession claim, a claimant cannot establish a prima facie case by relying solely on his testimony as to his subjective hostile intent. He must introduce evidence that such intent was objectively made manifest by his observable words or actions.

The absence of an agreement does not establish hostility for an adverse possession claim. Whether an agreement existed is relevant, but the presence or absence of an agreement is not the essential finding.

Recorded documents cannot establish adverse possession because they are not evidence of hostile acts for purposes of adverse possession.

Unjust enrichment requires (1) an enrichment; (2) an impoverishment; (3) a connection between the enrichment and the impoverishment; (4) absence of a justification for the enrichment and impoverishment; and (5) an absence of a remedy provided by law.

State v. Gramkow 2025 ND 115
Docket No.: 20250034
Filing Date: 6/18/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury trial is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Carpenter v. Southbay Homeowners Association 2025 ND 114
Docket No.: 20240327
Filing Date: 6/18/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The right to enforce a restriction may be lost by waiver. A waiver occurs when a person voluntarily and intentionally relinquishes a known right or privilege. Generally, the existence of a waiver is a question of fact, but if circumstances of an alleged waiver are admitted or clearly established and reasonable persons can draw only one conclusion from those circumstances, the existence of waiver is a question of law. Whether a waiver has occurred depends on the facts and circumstances of each particular case.

A party may waive a condition despite the presence of a non-waiver provision. But, to establish a non-waiver provision is not enforceable, the party asserting a waiver must show a clear intent to waive both the waiver clause and the underlying contract provision.

A court may award just damages and single or double costs, including reasonable attorney's fees, if it determines an appeal is frivolous. Affirming a summary judgment does not necessarily mean the appeal is frivolous.

Interest of Hicks 2025 ND 113
Docket No.: 20250025
Filing Date: 6/18/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's order denying a petition for discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Glaum v. Drake 2025 ND 112
Docket No.: 20250005
Filing Date: 6/18/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: When claims are fully adjudicated on the merits following a bench trial, the district court correctly enters a judgment of dismissal with prejudice.

The judgment of dismissal with prejudice is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7).

Gum v. Muddy Boyz Drywall 2025 ND 111
Docket No.: 20250045
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A party does not have a right to appeal if there is no final judgment or proper N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) certification.

Kemp, et al. v. Kvislen, et al. 2025 ND 110
Docket No.: 20240356
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment denying a petition for nonparent custody or visitation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Gonzalez v. State 2025 ND 109
Docket No.: 20250019
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Generally, attacking an expired sentence is a moot argument. When the criminal judgment does not include a term of probation, the expired sentence does not continue to have collateral consequences. When a term of imprisonment has been completed, any additional credit for time served is academic and irrelevant. The Court does not render advisory opinions, and an appeal will be dismissed if the issues become moot or academic, leaving no actual controversy to be determined.

State v. Landsberger 2025 ND 108
Docket No.: 20240255
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Jury instructions are fully reviewable on appeal and are reviewed as a whole to determine if they correctly and adequately inform the jury of the applicable law.

Jury instructions will not be reversed unless the instructions as a whole are erroneous, relate to a central subject in the case, and affect a substantial right of the accused.

Interest of M.K. 2025 ND 107
Docket No.: 20250140
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
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. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

State v. Lampert 2025 ND 106
Docket No.: 20240271
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A jury's verdict was summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). A district court's order was summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Weber v. Pennington 2025 ND 105
Docket No.: 20240323
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A party seeking modification of primary residential responsibility two years after entry of the prior order establishing primary residential responsibility must establish a prima facie case justifying modification.

A party must show a material change in circumstances and either a general decline in the condition of the child or that the material change has adversely affected the child.

A party moving for primary residential responsibility is entitled to an evidentiary hearing only if new facts have arisen since the prior order constituting a material change of circumstances, and if modification serves the best interests of the child.

Parents have a mutual responsibility to provide support for their children regardless of if the need arises during a parent's specified parenting time. A party must show a child has been adversely affected for there to be a material change in circumstances which warrants modification of the residential responsibility order.

Interest of C.B. 2025 ND 104
Docket No.: 20240350
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order extending placement of a child in the custody and control of the Grand Forks County Human Service Zone for a period of twelve months after finding the child is a child in need of protection is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

State v. Leingang 2025 ND 103
Docket No.: 20240243
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Issues not raised at trial will not be addressed on appeal unless the alleged error rises to the level of obvious error under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b). To establish obvious error, the defendant has the burden to demonstrate plain error which affected his substantial rights. However, if a party fails to argue obvious error, it is difficult for this Court to conclude this burden has been satisfied and this Court need not address it further.

Under Rule 1004(a), N.D.R.Ev., an original is not required, and other evidence of the content of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible if all the originals are lost or destroyed, and not by the proponent acting in bad faith.

Interest of D.B. 2025 ND 102
Docket No.: 20250111
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Interest of C.B. 2025 ND 102
Docket No.: 20250112
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Interest of M.B. 2025 ND 102
Docket No.: 20250113
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Severson v. Gupta, et al. 2025 ND 101
Docket No.: 20240292
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An appeal from a district court judgment granting a motion for summary judgment is reviewed under the de novo standard.

N.D.R.Civ.P. 56 allows a court to grant summary judgment for prompt and expeditious disposition of a controversy without a trial if either party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and if no dispute exists as to either the material facts or the inferences to be drawn from undisputed facts, or if resolving disputed facts would not alter the result.

A district court did not err granting a motion for summary judgment dismissing a claim of medical malpractice because the plaintiff failed to provide an affidavit containing an expert opinion as required by N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46.

Holm v. Holm 2025 ND 100
Docket No.: 20240246
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: This Court may summarily affirm judgments and orders when briefs do not meet the minimum requirements of the North Dakota Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Under the applicable rules, if an electronically filed document is rejected, the tolling of the filing does not change the date of service, which is the date the document was transmitted.

The statutory default valuation date under N.D.C.C. § 14-05-24(1) is "sixty days before the initially scheduled trial date," not the date of trial.

When a court uses the parties' mutually agreed-to valuations, the court's finding of a different valuation date is harmless as to those assets and debts.

A district court places a value on martial property based on the evidence presented by the parties. When the court is "not given much information" regarding the value of a marital asset, the court's decision is limited by the parties' failure to provide information.

State v. Weltikol 2025 ND 99
Docket No.: 20240336
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).