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.
5351 - 5400 of 12382 results
|
State v. Bartelson
2005 ND 172
Highlight: An officer's subjective intent is irrelevant on the question of probable cause if a driver has committed a traffic violation. |
|
Hoffman v. Disciplinary Board
2005 ND 171
Highlight: A petitioner has the burden of establishing qualifications for reinstatement to the bar by clear and convincing evidence. |
|
City of Bismarck v. Witzke
2005 ND 170 Highlight: Conviction of attempted criminal mischief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Acuity Ins. Co. v. Meridian Ins. Co.
2005 ND 169 Highlight: Summary judgment in an insurance contribution action is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (6). |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Wilkes
2005 ND 168 Highlight: Lawyer disbarred for felony convictions. |
|
State v. Frankfurth
2005 ND 167
Highlight: A criminal information must contain all essential elements of the offense in order to charge that offense. |
|
Sayler v. State
2005 ND 166
Highlight: Ineffective assistance of counsel claims require a defendant to show that counsel's representation was objectively unreasonable and that the defendant was prejudiced by counsel's deficient performance. |
|
Mastrony v. Mastrony
2005 ND 165 Highlight: Divorce judgment awarding custody and dividing the marital estate is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Eagleman v. State (Cross-Ref. w/20030149)
2005 ND 164 Highlight: Denial of application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
|
State v. Leftbear
2005 ND 163 Highlight: A criminal judgment following a conviction for aggravated assault is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
State v. Allen
2005 ND 162 Highlight: Conviction of robbery is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
M.S.B. v. J.M.B. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2005 ND 161 Highlight: Judgment establishing physical custody of a minor child is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Oie
2005 ND 160 Highlight: A district court does not abuse its discretion in accepting a guilty plea when the factual basis is established through open court inquiry and review of the pre-sentence investigation report. |
|
State v. Moore
2005 ND 159 Highlight: Denial of motion to correct illegal sentence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1). |
|
Guardianship/Conservatorship of Onstad
2005 ND 158
Highlight: While N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) ordinarily may not be used as a substitute for an appeal or to relieve a party from deliberate choices, in unusual cases a party who has not taken an appeal may obtain relief on a 60(b) motion. |
|
Interest of K.G. (Confidential)
2005 ND 156 Highlight: A district court's finding, that no less restrictive treatment programs other than hospitalization are appropriate, will not be reversed unless it is clearly erroneous. |
|
Amerada Hess Corp., et al. v. Fong
2005 ND 155
Highlight: Gross-up amounts are not "foreign dividends" subject to partial exclusion under state tax law. |
|
Frisk v. Frisk
2005 ND 154 Highlight: A domestic violence protection order, originally entered under a stipulation or agreement specifically declining to issue findings regarding domestic violence, cannot be extended absent a threshold finding of actual or imminent domestic violence. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Hoffman
2005 ND 153 Highlight: An isolated instance of ordinary negligence does not constitute lack of competence or diligence under the rules of professional conduct. |
|
State v. Parisien (Consolidated w/20040349 & 20040350)
2005 ND 152
Highlight: All communications with jurors, after a case has been submitted to them, must be made in open court and in the presence of the defendant. |
|
Miller, et al. v. Diamond Resources, Inc.
2005 ND 150
Highlight: A proximate cause is a cause that, as a natural and continuous sequence unbroken by any controlling intervening cause, produces the injury, and without it the injury would not have occurred. |
|
Heart River Partners, et al. v. Goetzfried, et al.
2005 ND 149 Highlight: Parol evidence is admissible in an action to reform a written deed when, through fraud or mutual mistake of the parties, or a mistake by one party which the other at the time knew or suspected, the deed does not truly express the parties' intention. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Korsmo
2005 ND 148 Highlight: Interim suspension of lawyer ordered. |
|
Rojas v. Workforce Safety and Insurance, et al.
2005 ND 147
Highlight: Before a claimant's continuing workers compensation disability benefits may be terminated, WSI must provide pretermination notice of the contemplated action, a summary of the evidence supporting termination, and a meaningful pretermination opportunity to respond in writing to the alleged grounds for termination. |
|
CybrCollect, Inc. v. ND Dept. of Financial Institutions, et al.
2005 ND 146
Highlight: Consumer electronic fund transactions in North Dakota are subject to the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E, which was issued by the Federal Reserve Board to carry out the purpose of the Act. |
|
Estate of Richmond
2005 ND 145
Highlight: If the evidence presented in opposition to a motion for summary judgment is of insufficient caliber or quantity to allow a rational finder of fact to find fraud by clear and convincing evidence, there is no genuine issue of material fact. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Ward
2005 ND 144 Highlight: Lawyer reprimanded for violation of N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(f), ordered to pay restitution to former clients, and ordered to pay costs and attorney's fees associated with the disciplinary proceeding. |
|
City of Bismarck v. Judkins
2005 ND 143 Highlight: A constitutional error may be declared harmless if the court, after reviewing the entire record, is convinced that the error did not contribute to the verdict. |
|
Bladow v. Bladow
2005 ND 142
Highlight: Issues that are not raised in pleadings may be tried by the express or implied consent of the parties. |
|
Case Credit Corp. v. Oppegard's Inc.
2005 ND 141
Highlight: Jury instructions do not need to include a definition of a commonly understood word when such a definition has not been requested. Giving a definition of a commonly understood word is a matter of the trial court's discretion. |
|
State v. Ressler
2005 ND 140
Highlight: Reasonable suspicion does not permit law enforcement authorities to transport a seized package from the place where suspicion arose to a law enforcement center for further investigation. |
|
Simburger v. Simburger
2005 ND 139
Highlight: Once an initial custody decision has been made, visitation is governed by N.D.C.C. 14-05-22(2). |
|
Interest of B.J.K. (Confidential)
2005 ND 138
Highlight: A juvenile court's finding of deprivation will not be set aside unless it is clearly erroneous. |
|
State v. Jackson
2005 ND 137
Highlight: When the court dismisses a criminal information on the basis of its legal interpretation of a criminal statute, and not upon resolution of any factual element of the crime charged, the ruling is not a judgment of acquittal but a quashing of the information from which the State has a right to appeal. |
|
GO Committee, et al. v. City of Minot
2005 ND 136
Highlight: The judiciary's role in reviewing a municipality's interpretation and application of a municipal ordinance is limited by the doctrine of separation of powers to determining whether the municipality clearly abused its discretion. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Sundby (Consolidated w/ 20050189 - 20050194)
2005 ND 135 Highlight: Lawyer suspension ordered. |
|
State v. Barth
2005 ND 134
Highlight: Persistent use of profane and threatening language combined with threatening hand gestures is not constitutionally protected free speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. |
|
Citibank v. Reikowski
2005 ND 133 Highlight: Before accepting and filing an answer, a clerk should require the filing fee be paid or waived, however, if the clerk does not do so, the filing of the answer is not invalidated. |
|
Reineke v. Reineke (cross-ref. w/20030014)
2005 ND 132 Highlight: An ex-wife's enhanced burden to satisfy marital debt discharged in bankruptcy by her ex-husband is a material change in circumstances warranting a modification of spousal support, and such a modification does not violate U.S. bankruptcy law. |
|
Gonzalez v. Gonzalez
2005 ND 131
Highlight: Proposed findings prepared by trial counsel become the findings of the court when it affixes its signature to them. |
|
Interest of C.H. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2005 ND 130 Highlight: A district court's order for involuntary hospitalization must be based on clear and convincing evidence that there is a serious risk the individual will harm himself, others, or property if not hospitalized. |
|
Lee v. Lee
2005 ND 129
Highlight: A child support amount must be established in accordance with the guidelines. |
|
Syvertson v. State
2005 ND 128
Highlight: When establishing a Brady violation, the knowledge of the North Dakota State Hospital is not imputed to the State's Attorney's Office. |
|
Weinreis, et al. v. Hill, et al.
2005 ND 127 Highlight: A district court must consider the apparent or ostensible authority of an individual exercising the functions of a corporate officer to bind the corporation to an agreement. |
|
Anderson, et al. v. Selby
2005 ND 126
Highlight: Parol evidence is admissible in an action to reform a deed when, through a mistake by one party which the other at the time knew of or suspected, the deed does not truly express the parties' intent. |
|
State v. Hatlewick
2005 ND 125
Highlight: A conviction is supported by sufficient evidence when a rational fact finder, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and giving the prosecution the benefit of all inferences reasonably to be drawn in its favor, is able to determine from the evidence that a defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. |
|
State v. Seglen
2005 ND 124
Highlight: The Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures applies only to government action and not to private parties. |
|
Ebach v. Ebach
2005 ND 123 Highlight: Whether a supporting spouse's early retirement constitutes a material change of circumstances to justify a termination or reduction of spousal support depends on the totality of the circumstances. |
|
Guardianship of Barros
2005 ND 122
Highlight: To terminate a voluntary guardianship, a fit parent must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the impediments leading to the creation of the guardianship have been removed. |
|
State v. Jackson (Consolidated w/20050021)
2005 ND 121 Highlight: Driving under suspension conviction is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(3), and (7). |