Opinions
On this page, you can search and view the Supreme Court’s opinions. If you wish to review the docket or documents filed in a matter, please go to the Court’s public portal search page.
5201 - 5250 of 12359 results
Interest of Spicer
2006 ND 79
Highlight: When a district court fails to specifically state its findings, its decision will not be upset when valid reasons for the decision are discernable, either by deduction or inference. |
Larson v. Schuetzle
2006 ND 78
Highlight: The State Penitentiary warden has authority and control over the penitentiary and its inmates. |
State v. Genre (Cons. w/20050239,20050247& 20050248)
2006 ND 77
Highlight: Voluntary consent to search is an exception to the warrant requirement. |
Flanagan v. State (Cross-Ref. w/20030247)
2006 ND 76
Highlight: An application for post-conviction relief may be denied as res judicata if the claim is a variation of a claim that was fully and finally determined in a previous proceeding. |
Gustafson v. ND Department of Human Services
2006 ND 75
Highlight: Under the 2003 version of the statute, for Medicaid eligibility, the purchase of an annuity is considered an uncompensated assignment or transfer of assets if it is not expected to return the full principal and interest within the purchaser's life expectancy. |
State v. Davenport (cross-ref. w/2000148)
2006 ND 74 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 Highlight: Lawyer reinstatement ordered. |
Hopfauf, et al. v. Hieb, et al.
2006 ND 72
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. |
Bernabucci, et al. v. Huber, et al.
2006 ND 71
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. |
Thompson v. Workforce Safety and Insurance, et al.
2006 ND 69
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. |
Victor v. Workforce Safety & Insurance, et al. (Consolidated w/20050400)
2006 ND 68 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 |
Nesvig v. Nesvig (cross-ref. w/20030041)
2006 ND 66
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. |
Rothberg v. Rothberg
2006 ND 65
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. |
Kramer v. Kramer
2006 ND 64 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
Highlight: Probation and restitution in a felony case may be extended for only one additional period of probation, not to exceed five years. |
State v. Moran
2006 ND 62
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. |
Parizek v. State (Cons. w/20050261 & 20050262)
2006 ND 61
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. |
Brown v. State Board of Higher Education
2006 ND 60 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 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
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. |
Sack v. Sack
2006 ND 57
Highlight: The disadvantaged-spouse requirement for spousal support is abolished. |
Matter of G.R.H.
2006 ND 56
Highlight: Involuntary civil commitment of a sexually dangerous person is reviewed under modified clearly erroneous standard of review. |
Sisk v. Sisk
2006 ND 55
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. |
Thompson v. Olson
2006 ND 54 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 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 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 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 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
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. |
Fischer, et al. v. Berger, et al.
2006 ND 48
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. |
Interest of F.F., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2006 ND 47 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
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. |
State v. Bergstrom
2006 ND 45
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. |
State v. Anderson (CONSOLIDATED W/ 20050229)
2006 ND 44
Highlight: Information from an informant may provide the factual basis to establish reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop. |
Causer v. State (cross-ref. w/20030124)
2006 ND 43 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 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
Highlight: The writ of audita querela has been abolished in North Dakota. |
Ficklin v. Ficklin (CONFIDENTIAL)
2006 ND 40
Highlight: Before a court may enter a protection order, there must be a showing of actual or imminent domestic violence. |
State v. Stewart (Consolidated w/20050080 thru 20050086)
2006 ND 39
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. |
State v. Garten
2006 ND 38 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 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
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. |
Preference Personnel, Inc. v. Peterson
2006 ND 35
Highlight: The Department of Labor may not issue retroactive licenses for employment agencies. |
Stein v. Workforce Safety and Ins., et al.
2006 ND 34
Highlight: A court cannot ignore the clear language of a statute under the guise of liberal construction. |
MBNA v. Hart
2006 ND 33 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
Highlight: An expert's testimony may not be used merely as a conduit to place otherwise inadmissible evidence before a jury. |
Bertsch v. Bertsch
2006 ND 31
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. |
Interest of D.D., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL)(Consolidated w/ 20050177)
2006 ND 30
Highlight: Findings of fact in juvenile proceedings will not be set aside on appeal unless clearly erroneous. |
Simon v. Simon (Consolidated w/20050356)
2006 ND 29 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. |