Opinions

State v. Davenport (cross-ref. w/2000148) 2006 ND 74
Docket No.: 20050274
Filing Date: 4/19/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order revoking probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Edin v. Disciplinary Board 2006 ND 73
Docket No.: 20060102
Filing Date: 4/13/2006
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Original Proceeding
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Lawyer reinstatement ordered.

Hopfauf, et al. v. Hieb, et al. 2006 ND 72
Docket No.: 20050203
Filing Date: 4/6/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Summary judgment is properly granted if the information available to the trial court precluded the existence of a genuine issue of material fact, entitling the moving party to summary judgment as a matter of law.
A district court's denial of a request for additional time for discovery under N.D.R.Civ.P. 56(f) is not overturned on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.
An element of negligent failure to obtain informed consent, as in any negligence action, is the existence and extent of a duty. A duty to disclose can only arise if the physician knew or should have known of the risks to be disclosed.

Bernabucci, et al. v. Huber, et al. 2006 ND 71
Docket No.: 20050275
Filing Date: 4/3/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Corporations
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: If extrinsic evidence is conclusive and undisputed, the determination of the meaning of a contract is a function for the court to resolve as a matter of law.
A court does not abuse its discretion when it denies a requested amendment to a complaint which would be futile.

Toso v. Workforce Safety & Insurance 2006 ND 70
Docket No.: 20050143
Filing Date: 4/3/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Thompson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance, et al. 2006 ND 69
Docket No.: 20050392
Filing Date: 3/31/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: When reviewing the decision of an administrative agency, courts do not make independent findings of fact or substitute their judgment for that of the agency, but determine whether a reasoning mind could reasonably have determined that the factual conclusions reached were supported by the weight of the record.
If the decision of the administrative agency was consistent with the opinion of the sole testifying physician, the agency's decision was supported by the weight of the record.

Victor v. Workforce Safety & Insurance, et al. (Consolidated w/20050400) 2006 ND 68
Docket No.: 20050384
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Workforce Safety and Insurance has discretion in determining what rehabilitative services are reasonably necessary and a reasoning mind reasonably could have decided that a $10,000 animal hoist was not a reasonably necessary rehabilitative service for a worker employed at a dog grooming business.

Manning v. Manning 2006 ND 67
Docket No.: 20050065
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Nesvig v. Nesvig (cross-ref. w/20030041) 2006 ND 66
Docket No.: 20050125
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: In deciding whether to compel testimony of an unretained expert, the court should consider: whether the expert is being called to testify about facts of the case or to give opinion testimony; the difference between testifying to a previously formed or expressed opinion and forming a new one; whether the witness is a unique expert; the likelihood a comparable witness will willingly testify; and the degree the witness is oppressed by having to continually testify.
The district court does not abuse its discretion by failing to sequester an expert witness from observing trial testimony where the expert's presence is essential to presentation of the party's cause and no prejudice results.

Rothberg v. Rothberg 2006 ND 65
Docket No.: 20050198
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: An order denying a motion to modify child support or spousal support that is intended to be the final order of the court is appealable.
Conclusory, general findings of fact do not comply with N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a), and the trial court must specifically state the subordinate facts upon which its ultimate factual conclusions rest.
In deciding whether to award attorney fees in a divorce proceeding, the court must consider the parties' financial needs and ability to pay.

Kramer v. Kramer 2006 ND 64
Docket No.: 20050222
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A district court should ordinarily not order a distribution of marital property that is inconsistent with the parties' contract, but a court may set aside a property settlement agreement if the agreement is executed under mistake, duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence, or if the agreement is unconscionable.

State v. Stavig 2006 ND 63
Docket No.: 20050278
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Probation and restitution in a felony case may be extended for only one additional period of probation, not to exceed five years.
Ona revocation of probation appeal: (1) the Court reviews under a clearly erroneous standard whether the defendant violated his or her probation; and (2) the Court reviews under an abuse of discretion standard whether the district court's revoking the defendant's probation.

State v. Moran 2006 ND 62
Docket No.: 20050244
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Four factors must be weighted to decide whether a defendant's right to a speedy trial has been violated: (1) the length of the delay, (2) the reason for the delay, (3) the accused's assertion of his right to a speedy trial, and (4) the prejudice to the accused.
The State must actively try to serve a warrant, or it risks being negligent for not diligently pursuing the accused.
When the State diligently pursues the defendant, the defendant must prove actual prejudice; when the State intentionally delays prosecution because of a bad-faith motive, prejudice is presumed; and when the State has been negligent by not diligently pursuing the defendant, the weight of the other factors and the length of the delay controls whether prejudice must be actual or may be presumed.
The State does not err in its closing argument when it does not refer to its burden of proof so long as it does not imply a lesser burden of proof.

Parizek v. State (Cons. w/20050261 & 20050262) 2006 ND 61
Docket No.: 20050260
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: Before the district court may summarily dismiss an application for post-conviction relief, the State's response to the application must be sufficient to put the applicant on his proof, shifting the burden to require the applicant to produce competent evidence to support his claims prior to the evidentiary hearing.
To justify summary dismissal of an application for post-conviction relief, the district court must find the applicant's claims invalid on their face.

Brown v. State Board of Higher Education 2006 ND 60
Docket No.: 20050365
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A university student with a grievance against the university is required to exhaust the university's internal procedures, provided by the university's policies, for handling such grievances prior to bringing a claim in court.

Thomas, et al. v. Stone 2006 ND 59
Docket No.: 20050269
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An insured's authority to designate beneficiaries in a life insurance policy may be limited by an agreement or judgment.

Beckler v. Bismarck Public School Dist. 2006 ND 58
Docket No.: 20050195
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: The party resisting summary judgment cannot merely rely on pleadings, briefs, unsupported and conclusory allegations, or speculation to defeat a summary judgment motion but must present enough evidence for a reasonable jury to find for the plaintiff.
To succeed in a negligence claim, the plaintiff must prove the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff, the defendant failed to discharge that duty, and the plaintiff has suffered an injury that was proximately caused by the defendant's negligence.
A landowner owes a duty of care to lawful entrants to keep its property in a reasonably safe condition, considering all the circumstances, which include the likelihood of injury to another, the seriousness of the injury, and the burden of avoiding the risk.
A proximate cause is a cause which, as a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any controlling intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which it would not have occurred.

Sack v. Sack 2006 ND 57
Docket No.: 20050167
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The disadvantaged-spouse requirement for spousal support is abolished.
Spousal support decisions are to be based on the Ruff-Fischer guidelines.
A court may award items of personal property to a party if the other party agrees to the award in court.

Matter of G.R.H. 2006 ND 56
Docket No.: 20040287
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Involuntary civil commitment of a sexually dangerous person is reviewed under modified clearly erroneous standard of review.
Under statute for committing sexually dangerous person, proof of nexus between the requisite disorder and dangerousness encompasses proof that the disorder involves serious difficulty in controlling behavior and suffices to distinguish a dangerous sexual offender whose disorder subjects him to civil commitment from the dangerous but typical recidivist in a criminal case.
The executive director of the Department of Human Services may decide the least restrictive available treatment for a sexually dangerous individual, and that procedure does not violate due process or double jeopardy.

Sisk v. Sisk 2006 ND 55
Docket No.: 20050232
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Visitation between a non-custodial parent and child is presumed to be in that child's best interests but may be curtailed or eliminated if likely to endanger a child's emotional or physical health.
A trial court must award reasonable attorney fees and costs to the non-custodial parent if there has been a willful and persistent denial of visitation.

Thompson v. Olson 2006 ND 54
Docket No.: 20050091
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Whether injuries rise to the level of serious bodily injuries for purposes of applying the domestic violence presumption against custody is a finding of fact which will not be reversed on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous.

State v. Smith 2006 ND 53
Docket No.: 20050181
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Other
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Convictions of attempted kidnapping, aggravated assault, and terrorizing are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

State v. Feist 2006 ND 52
Docket No.: 20050423
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Other
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7).

Krall v. State (Consol. w/20050212 & 20050213) (cross-ref. 20000004) 2006 ND 51
Docket No.: 20050211
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Denial of applications for post-conviction relief and motions for default judgment are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Arth v. Arth 2006 ND 50
Docket No.: 20050061
Filing Date: 3/29/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Order for dismissal of lawsuit with prejudice is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6).

State v. Hoverson 2006 ND 49
Docket No.: 20050237
Filing Date: 3/2/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: The level of outrageous conduct necessary to prove a due process violation and bar prosecution is quite high and must shock the conscience of the court.
A trial court may permit cross-examination of a witness regarding the underlying facts of a conviction involving dishonesty or deceit.
A trial court may permit cross-examination of a witness regarding specific instances of conduct not resulting in a conviction.
A sentencing court may make reasonable inferences based upon evidence in the record, and those inferences may be a factor in sentencing.

Fischer, et al. v. Berger, et al. 2006 ND 48
Docket No.: 20050182
Filing Date: 2/28/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A use of land creates an easement by prescription if the use is adverse, continuous and uninterrupted, and for the 20-year period of prescription.
The doctrine of acquiescence does not apply to a claim for an easement by prescription for a road across another's property.

Interest of F.F., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2006 ND 47
Docket No.: 20050210
Filing Date: 2/28/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A court may terminate parental rights on finding the child (1) is deprived and (2) has been in foster care for at least four hundred fifty of the previous six hundred sixty nights.

Berge v. Berge 2006 ND 46
Docket No.: 20050124
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: When a trial court does not clearly state how it calculated the amount of child support, the Supreme Court will reverse and remand for an explanation even if the record contains adequate evidence for the trial court to make a precise finding.
Nonrecurrent payments are includable in an obligor's income for determining child support.
It is improper to calculate an obligor's annual employment income based on a mid- year pay stub when the obligor's employment income is reflected on the obligor's prior year's tax return.
If an obligor's most recent annual earnings are a more reliable indicator of future circumstances, the most recent annual earnings may be used to calculate a child support obligation.

State v. Bergstrom 2006 ND 45
Docket No.: 20050110
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: In a civil forfeiture action, the State must show probable cause exists to bring the forfeiture action, and then the claimant must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, the property is not subject to forfeiture.
Because forfeiture is a civil proceeding, apart from an underlying criminal proceeding, the burden of each party does not change when the defendant is acquitted of the criminal charge.
A district court may not rely on a prior probable cause determination, made when a search warrant was issued, to conclude there was probable cause to bring a civil forfeiture action.
Findings of fact are adequate if they provide this Court with an understanding of the district court's factual basis used in reaching its determination.
A court must balance four factors when deciding if a delay in bringing a forfeiture action has violated the claimant's due process rights: length of delay, the reason for the delay, the claimant's assertion of his right, and prejudice to the claimant.

State v. Anderson (CONSOLIDATED W/ 20050229) 2006 ND 44
Docket No.: 20050202
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Information from an informant may provide the factual basis to establish reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop.
Circumstances of a case must be evaluated in determining whether actions taken by law enforcement officers during an investigatory stop are reasonable and do not amount to a defacto arrest.
The public safety exception to Miranda allows admission of statements a suspect makes in answering questions about whether the suspect has a weapon.
Law enforcement officers may conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle for weapons or additional occupants under the public safety exception to the warrant requirement.

Causer v. State (cross-ref. w/20030124) 2006 ND 43
Docket No.: 20050389
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Denial of application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (7).

Ward County Farm Bureau, et al. v. Poolman 2006 ND 42
Docket No.: 20050170
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Original Proceeding - Civil - Writ of Mandamus
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A petitioner for a writ of mandamus must first demonstrate a clear legal right to performance of the particular act sought to be compelled by the writ.

State v. Ernst 2006 ND 41
Docket No.: 20050395
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: The writ of audita querela has been abolished in North Dakota.
Opposite-sex surveillance of male inmates is constitutionally permissible because minimal intrusions on prisoner's privacy were outweighed by institutional concerns for safety and equal employment opportunity.

Ficklin v. Ficklin (CONFIDENTIAL) 2006 ND 40
Docket No.: 20050364
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: Before a court may enter a protection order, there must be a showing of actual or imminent domestic violence.
Past abusive behavior is a relevant factor to consider in determining whether domestic violence is actual or imminent.
Where a person might live after the issuance of a domestic violence protection order is not relevant to the issuance of a domestic violence protection order.
The use of a standardized form does not excuse a court's duty to make findings that support the issuance of the order and allow for an intelligible review of a case on appeal.

State v. Stewart (Consolidated w/20050080 thru 20050086) 2006 ND 39
Docket No.: 20050079
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The Court looks at the "totality of the circumstances" on appeal, giving deference to the district court's findings, to determine whether a search warrant was supported by probable cause.
A search warrant must describe with particularity the places to be searched and items to be seized to avoid "exploratory rummaging" in its execution.
The State must provide actual notice of its intention to admit prior bad acts testimony.

State v. Garten 2006 ND 38
Docket No.: 20050208
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Denials of a motion to suppress, motion to sever the counts against the defendant, and a motion for new trial are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

State v. Klein 2006 ND 37
Docket No.: 20050293
Filing Date: 2/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Conviction for driving while under the influence of alcohol summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (3).

Maynard v. McNett 2006 ND 36
Docket No.: 20050090
Filing Date: 2/8/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: When divorced parents share custody, the designation of a single custodian is not required, each parent can be declared a custodian, and both parents have all the legal rights designated to a custodial parent.
A parent with joint legal and physical custody may not be granted permission to move with the divorced parents' child, unless the district court first determines the best interests of the child require a change in primary custody to that parent.
A parent with joint physical and legal custody who wishes to relocate with the child must make two motions before the parent may be given permission to relocate: one for a change of custody and one to relocate with the child.
When a parent with joint legal and physical custody moves for change of custody and permission to relocate, the statutory best-interests-of-the-child factors must be applied rather than the Stout-Hawkinson factors, because the Stout-Hawkinson factors were designed to address the best interests of the child when a primary custodian has already been designated.

Preference Personnel, Inc. v. Peterson 2006 ND 35
Docket No.: 20050255
Filing Date: 2/8/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: The Department of Labor may not issue retroactive licenses for employment agencies.
If public policy considerations require employment agencies to undergo extensive licensing requirements before being allowed to legally conduct business in this State, it follows that it is against the public policy of this State to enforce a contract between an individual and an unlicensed employment agency.

Stein v. Workforce Safety and Ins., et al. 2006 ND 34
Docket No.: 20050196
Filing Date: 2/6/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A court cannot ignore the clear language of a statute under the guise of liberal construction.
A recalculation of average weekly wage under N.D.C.C. § 65-05-09(1) is authorized only if the employee is able to return to employment for twelve consecutive months or more before the recurrence of the disability that is the subject of the recalculation.

MBNA v. Hart 2006 ND 33
Docket No.: 20050179
Filing Date: 2/3/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Debtor/Creditor
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A court must confirm an arbitration award upon application of any party to the award unless a party has filed a motion with the court to vacate, modify, or correct the award within 90 days after delivery of a copy of the award, or within 90 days after grounds are known or should have been known to the injured party if the motion to vacate is based on corruption, fraud, or other undue means.

Davis v. Killu, et al. 2006 ND 32
Docket No.: 20040301
Filing Date: 2/2/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An expert's testimony may not be used merely as a conduit to place otherwise inadmissible evidence before a jury.
Parties are required to create a record that will permit informed appellate review.
Nonprejudical mistakes by the trial court constitute harmless error and are not grounds for reversal.
A failure to object acts as a waiver of the claim of error.

Bertsch v. Bertsch 2006 ND 31
Docket No.: 20050183
Filing Date: 2/2/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: In deciding whether to award attorney fees under N.D.C.C. § 14-05-23, the trial court must balance one party's needs against the other party's ability to pay.
In awarding attorney fees, fault is only relevant to the extent one party has unreasonably escalated the fees.

Interest of D.D., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL)(Consolidated w/ 20050177) 2006 ND 30
Docket No.: 20050176
Filing Date: 1/31/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Juvenile Law
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Findings of fact in juvenile proceedings will not be set aside on appeal unless clearly erroneous.
Although incarceration, by itself, does not establish abandonment of a child for purposes of terminating parental rights, a probability of harm to the child may be established by prognostic evidence that a parent's current inability to care for the child will continue long enough to render improbable the successful assimilation of the child into a family if the parent's rights are not terminated.

Simon v. Simon (Consolidated w/20050356) 2006 ND 29
Docket No.: 20050279
Filing Date: 1/31/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: The offset provisions of the split custody and equal custody regulations of the child support guidelines continue to apply to the parents' child support obligations when one parent assigns the right to receive child support to the State as reimbursement for TANF benefits received.

Schwan v. Folden 2006 ND 28
Docket No.: 20050185
Filing Date: 1/31/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: If a plaintiff does not move for default judgment after the default has occurred or within a reasonable time after the default, and the answer is subsequently filed, the plaintiff waives its right to default judgment for a defendant's failure to appear.
The strong preference of the courts is to decide cases on their merits rather than by default judgment.
A party who proceeds to trial rather than pursuing a default judgment waives its right to default judgment.
Only items in the record may be included in the appendix, and the Supreme Court may take appropriate action against any person failing comply with this rule.

Lentz v. Spryncznatyk 2006 ND 27
Docket No.: 20050234
Filing Date: 1/31/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A statute is employed retroactively when it is applied to a cause of action that arose prior to the effective date of the statute.
A statute is not retroactively applied merely because prior convictions are used that occurred before the effective date of a statute, as long as the triggering offense occurred after the effective date of the statute.

Dunn v. State 2006 ND 26
Docket No.: 20050336
Filing Date: 1/31/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A motion for summary dismissal under the Uniform Post-Conviction Relief Act is akin to a motion for summary judgment.
Thirty days' response time is allowed following motions for summary dismissal under the Uniform Post-Conviction Relief Act.
Summary dismissal is appropriate if the petitioner in a post-conviction relief action fails to raise a genuine issue of material fact.

State v. Nikle 2006 ND 25
Docket No.: 20050172
Filing Date: 1/31/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Great weight is given to a potential juror's claim that he or she will maintain impartiality.
No legal rule is violated if a jury panel is not rejected after one venireperson makes a comment which, though arguably inappropriate, does not affect the fairness or impartiality of any member of the venire.
Assistance of counsel is effective if, despite counsel's "errors," the results of the proceedings would remain unchanged.