Search Tips


101 - 110 of 12805 results

Goldade-Jose v. Jose, et al. 2022 ND 33
Docket No.: 20210231
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying a request to lift the supervision requirement on parenting time is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Lessard v. Johnson 2022 ND 32
Docket No.: 20200206
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The effect of a judgment decreeing a divorce is to restore the parties to the state of unmarried persons, but neither party to a divorce may marry except in accordance with the decree of the court granting the divorce.

Whether a moving party has established a prima facie case for a modification of primary residential responsibility presents a question of law, reviewed de novo on appeal.

A district court’s decision whether to grant a protective order limiting discovery is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.

A parent moving for permission to relocate has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the move is in the child’s best interests. To decide whether relocation is in a child’s best interests, the district court applies the four Stout-Hawkinson factors.

A district court may award attorney’s fees and costs to remedy abuse caused by successive frivolous post-judgment motions.

State v. Halsey 2022 ND 31
Docket No.: 20210090
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court’s admission of prior bad acts evidence without the required three-step analyis was harmless error.

Absent a stipulation offered from a defendant, a court does not abuse its discretion in allowing the name and nature of a felony charge to be admitted into evidence to prove an element of the offense of preventing arrest.

State v. Davis 2022 ND 30
Docket No.: 20210152
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Constitutional forfeiture doctrine recognized by adopting the hearsay exception under N.D.R.Ev. 804(b)(6).

Forfeiture by wrongdoing requires the State to prove (1) that the declarant-witness is unavailable; (2) that the defendant engaged in wrongful conduct; (3) that the wrongful conduct procured the unavailability of the witness; and (4) that the defendant intended to procure the unavailability of the witness.

Forfeiture by wrongdoing was properly applied where the district court found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendant murdered victim with intent to prevent testimony at criminal proceedings.

The State is not required to prove defendant intended to prevent victim from testifying in the same case in which testimony was offered. Intent to prevent testimony in foreseeable proceeding or investigation is sufficient.

A sentence is illegal if it is not authorized by the judgment of conviction, and a district court must abide by the terms of the judgment when amending the judgment to include restitution.

Orwig v. Orwig 2022 ND 29
Docket No.: 20210140
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Failure to comply with provisions of a separation or divorce decree relating to distribution of the parties’ property constitutes contempt of court.

A person aggrieved by contempt of court may seek imposition of a remedial sanction for the contempt by filing a motion for that purpose.

A party seeking a contempt sanction must clearly and satisfactorily prove the alleged contempt was committed.

Whether a contempt has been committed lies within the district court’s sound discretion, which will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.

Krile v. Lawyer 2022 ND 28
Docket No.: 20210138
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald W.

Highlight: A motion to dismiss under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) is not automatically converted to a motion for summary judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 56 when a party submits additional materials outside the pleadings, and the court has discretion in deciding whether to exclude the additional materials.
A pleading that states a claim for relief is not required to have detailed factual allegations, but it must have more than labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a claim.

Christiansen v. NDDOT 2022 ND 27
Docket No.: 20210218
Filing Date: 1/27/2022
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The Administrative Agencies Practice Act governs this Court’s review of the Department of Transportation’s decision to suspend a driver’s license.

Chapter 1-02, N.D.C.C., contains the traditional rules of statutory construction and interpretation.

Section 39-20-03.1, N.D.C.C., provides procedures law enforcement must follow after a person has tested over the legal limit for driving under the influence.

Section 39-20-04.1, N.D.C.C., provides the Department of Transportation’s authority to sanction a driver who has tested over the legal limit for driving under the influence.

Section 39-20-04.1(1), N.D.C.C., does not mention the timing of law enforcement forwarding the report, so the five-day directive to law enforcement in N.D.C.C. 39-20-03.1(4) does not affect the Department’s authority to suspend driving privileges.

When no remedy is provided by statute for a statutory violation, this Court looks at whether the victim of the violation was prejudiced.

Sherman v. Guillaume, et al. 2022 ND 26
Docket No.: 20210196
Filing Date: 1/27/2022
Case Type: CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A judgment determining primary residential responsibility of a minor child is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

State v. Clairmont 2022 ND 25
Docket No.: 20210219
Filing Date: 1/27/2022
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury found the defendant guilty of gross sexual imposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).

Divide County v. Stateline Service, et al. 2022 ND 24
Docket No.: 20210016
Filing Date: 1/21/2022
Case Type: OTHER (Civil)
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A road restriction is not published for purposes of N.D.C.C. § 39-12-03(2)(a) unless the information is available in the typical location where a user seeking such information would expect to find it.

Page 11 of 1281