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.
5501 - 5550 of 12446 results
Jorgensen v. ND Dept. of Transportation
2005 ND 80 Highlight: Inclusion of chemical test results in an officer's certified report to the Director of the North Dakota Department of Transportation under N.D.C.C. 39-20-03.1(3) is a basic and mandatory provision without which the department may not suspend a person's driving privileges. |
Edinger v. Governing Authority of Stutsman Co. Correctional Center
2005 ND 79 Highlight: When the information available to a governing body suggests a reasonable probability of future litigation or adversarial administrative proceedings, the governing body may close a portion of a public meeting and meet in executive session to receive and discuss the advice of its attorney. |
Interest of B.M., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2005 ND 78 Highlight: A judgment terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
State v. Bleibaum
2005 ND 77 Highlight: A criminal judgment following a jury conviction for aggravated assault, a class C felony, is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). |
May v. Sprynczynatyk
2005 ND 76
Highlight: Failure of the Department of Transportation to file the transcript of the administrative hearing within twenty days, as required by N.D.C.C. 39-20-06, does not automatically mandate summary reversal of the decision suspending a driver's license. |
State of ND v. NDSU, et al.
2005 ND 75
Highlight: For purposes of an insurance policy exclusion for surface water damage, surface water does not lose its character as surface water by being diverted underground through man-made structures. |
Home of Economy v. Burlington Northern
2005 ND 74 Highlight: The Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 does not preempt state jurisdiction over railroad grade crossings. |
Litoff v. Pinter
2005 ND 73 Highlight: An order denying a motion for reinstatement of unsupervised visitation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
Paulson v. Paulson
2005 ND 72
Highlight: A trial court cannot delegate to anyone the power to decide questions of child custody or related issues. |
H-T Enterprises v. Antelope Creek Bison Ranch
2005 ND 71
Highlight: The purpose of the no-counterclaim provision in the eviction statute is to get a speedy determination of possession. |
Harter v. ND Dept. of Transportation
2005 ND 70
Highlight: Section 39-20-04.1(1)(a), N.D.C.C., provides penalties for persons under the age of 21 who drive with a blood alcohol concentration of at least .02 percent by weight. |
Guardianship/Conservatorship of Van Sickle (Consolidated w/20040224)
2005 ND 69
Highlight: The Supreme Court will determine a moot issue if the matter is capable of repetition, yet evading review. |
Strand, et al. v. U.S. Bank National Association ND, et al.
2005 ND 68
Highlight: A party alleging that a contractual provision is unconscionable must demonstrate some quantum of both procedural and substantive unconscionability, and courts are to balance the various factors, viewed in totality, to determine whether the contractual provision is so one-sided as to be unconscionable. |
Larson v. Larson
2005 ND 67
Highlight: In construing a statute, courts are to ascertain the legislature's intent, which initially must be sought from the statutory language itself, giving it its plain, ordinary, and commonly understood meaning. |
Dvorak v. Dvorak
2005 ND 66
Highlight: Tax returns from the most recent five years are properly used to determine the self-employment income of an obligor in calculating child support obligations. |
Buri v. Ramsey, et al.
2005 ND 65
Highlight: A trial court's determination about whether a conversion has been committed is a finding of fact which will not be overturned on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous. |
Interest of A.M.S. (Consolidated w/20040269 & 20040270)
2005 ND 64
Highlight: Federal law permits decisions regarding rebuttal of child support payments to be made under criteria established by the State. |
State v. Krull
2005 ND 63
Highlight: If a defendant does not object at trial to the introduction of a child's hearsay statements regarding sexual abuse, our inquiry is limited to whether the admission into evidence constitutes obvious error affecting substantial rights. |
Doll v. ND Department of Transportation
2005 ND 62 Highlight: Guidelines for use of a standard solution are not part of the approved method for conducting an Intoxilyzer test unless the State Toxicologist expressly includes them in the approved method filed with the clerk of district court. |
City of Horace v. City of Fargo
2005 ND 61
Highlight: Annexation statutes are construed liberally to encourage the natural and well-ordered development of municipalities. |
Makeeff v. City of Bismarck
2005 ND 60
Highlight: A landowner is not immune from liability for an accident that occurs on the landowner's premises just because the accident was caused by a natural accumulation of snow and ice. |
State v. Nelson
2005 ND 59
Highlight: If an application for a search warrant contains statements intentionally false or made with reckless disregard for the truth, the false material must be set aside, and if the remaining content is insufficient to establish probable cause, the warrant must be voided and the fruits of the search excluded. |
Kastrow v. State
2005 ND 58 Highlight: Denial of post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
Wheeler v. Jahnke, et al. (Consol. w/20040362) (Cross-ref. w/20040341-20040343)
2005 ND 57 Highlight: A district court order affirming a magistrate's finding of probable cause to bind a defendant over for trial on charges of gross sexual imposition and encouraging the deprivation of a minor is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1). |
Jacob, et al. v. Nodak Mutual Ins. Co., et al.
2005 ND 56
Highlight: Age alone, without other evidence, is insufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment in an age discrimination case. |
Simpson, et al. v. Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co., et al.
2005 ND 55
Highlight: For purposes of res judicata and collateral estoppel, parties and their privies are barred by a former judgment. |
Interest of R.F. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2005 ND 54
Highlight: An individual found to be a person requiring mental-health treatment has the right to the least restrictive conditions necessary to achieve the purposes of treatment. |
Frieze v. Frieze
2005 ND 53
Highlight: Section 14-09-06.6(5), N.D.C.C., limits the grounds upon which a court may grant a motion to change custody which is brought within two years following entry of the order establishing custody, and includes the persistent and willful denial of interference with visitation or a present environment which may endanger or impair the child's physical or emotional health or development. |
Thomas v. Workforce Safety and Insurance, et al.
2005 ND 52
Highlight: A willful failure to give a maximum consistent effort in a functional capacity assessment can constitute noncompliance with vocational rehabilitation. |
Larsen v. ND Dept. of Transportation
2005 ND 51 Highlight: In interpreting a statute, a court may not disregard the letter of the statute under the pretext of pursuing its spirit, and may not add words to the statute. |
Roberts v. ND Department of Human Services
2005 ND 50
Highlight: An applicant for medicaid benefits has the burden of establishing eligibility for benefits and providing information necessary to establish eligibility. |
Kaiser v. State
2005 ND 49 Highlight: If, in responding to an application for post-conviction relief, the State moves for dismissal and presents matters outside the pleading and the court does not exclude them, the opposing party shall have 30 days after service of the State's brief within which to serve and file an answer brief and supporting papers. |
Gamboa v. State
2005 ND 48
Highlight: In post-conviction relief proceedings, it is not an abuse of discretion to deny default judgment when a petitioner cannot show he suffered any prejudice from the State's untimely response. |
Sweeney v. Sweeney (Cross-Ref. w/20010129)
2005 ND 47
Highlight: In divorce proceedings, a trial court must award reasonable attorney fees and court costs to one parent if it finds the other parent has made an allegation of harm to the child that is false and not made in good faith or if the court finds there has been willful and persistent denial of the noncustodial parent's visitation rights by the custodial parent. |
State v. Arth
2005 ND 46 Highlight: A sentence of five years' imprisonment with the last two years suspended for violation of a domestic violence protection order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
Disciplinary Board v. Schoppert
2005 ND 45 Highlight: Lawyer disbarment ordered. |
Ringsaker v. Workforce Safety & Insurance Fund, et al.
2005 ND 44 Highlight: An injured employee seeking workers compensation benefits must file a claim within one year after the injury. The date of injury is the first date that a reasonable person knew or should have known that he had suffered a work-related injury and has either lost wages because of a resulting disability or received medical treatment. |
Vogel v. Workforce Safety and Insurance, et al.
2005 ND 43
Highlight: In appeals from administrative agency decisions, challenged findings of fact are affirmed when supported by a preponderance of the evidence. |
State v. Ramsey
2005 ND 42
Highlight: A correct result will not be set aside merely because the trial court assigned an incorrect reason, if the result is the same under the correct law and reasoning. |
Ingebretson v. Ingebretson
2005 ND 41
Highlight: An award of permanent spousal support to a party who requested support for ten years must be supported by sufficient findings and based on the record. |
Lochthowe v. C.F. Peterson Estate
2005 ND 40
Highlight: A third party who derives gain from an agreement between others has not necessarily been unjustly enriched, unless the third party has participated somehow in the transaction through which the benefit is obtained. |
Interest of D.P.O. (Cross-ref. w/20030002 & 20030020)
2005 ND 39
Highlight: On appeal, an issue will not be decided if it has become moot because events have occurred which make it impossible for the Court to issue relief or the passage of time has made the issue moot. |
Rhodes v. Rhodes
2005 ND 38 Highlight: A prenuptial agreement is a contract, and its interpretation is primarily a question of law for the court to decide. |
Fast v. Mayer
2005 ND 37
Highlight: When a trial court considers restrictions on a noncustodial parent's visitation rights, the standard of proof required is a preponderance of the evidence. |
Mann, et al. v. ND Tax Commissioner, et al.
2005 ND 36
Highlight: A final order or judgment is necessary for appealability in an injunction action. |
Brandt, et al. v. Somerville, et al.
2005 ND 35
Highlight: N.D.C.C. ch. 10-19.1 governs claims for breaches of fiduciary duties by those in control of a close corporation, and a trial court's findings about claims for breaches of fiduciary duties are reviewed under the clearly erroneous rule. |
Tibert, et al. v. Slominski, et al.
2005 ND 34
Highlight: The agricultural nuisance shield of N.D.C.C. 42-04-02 extends to all corporations and limited liability companies that meet the requirements of N.D.C.C. 42-04-01 regardless of whether they meet the more limited requirements of the corporate farming law. |
Beckler v. Workforce Safety and Insurance
2005 ND 33
Highlight: A claimant seeking reinstatement of discontinued disability benefits must show a significant change in his compensable medical condition and an actual wage loss caused by the change in medical condition. |
Pratt v. Altendorf
2005 ND 32
Highlight: Dismissal of a civil action, without prejudice, is ordinarily not appealable, but it is considered final and appealable if it has the practical effect of terminating the litigation in the plaintiff's chosen forum. |
Wigginton v. Wigginton
2005 ND 31
Highlight: An award of restricted visitation is not clearly erroneous when based on evidence in the record. |