Opinions

Estate of Risovi
Docket No.: 19870274
Filing Date: 9/20/1988
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Meschke, Herbert

State v. Schwalk
Docket No.: 19870275
Filing Date: 10/18/1988
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Levine, Beryl

Sjolin (Vernon) v. Frojen (Henry)
Docket No.: 19870276
Filing Date: 5/17/1988
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Per Curiam

Parrow v. Parrow
Docket No.: 19870277
Filing Date: 5/16/1988
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Olson v. ND Workers Compensation Bureau, et al.
Docket No.: 19870278
Filing Date: 2/25/1988
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Meschke, Herbert

State v. Erban
Docket No.: 19870281
Filing Date: 9/20/1988
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Meschke, Herbert

State v. Bernstein 2005 ND App6
Docket No.: 20040298
Filing Date: 5/26/2005
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: To satisfy the knowledge element of criminal trespass under N.D.C.C. 12.1-22-03(3), the State must prove that the defendant knew or had a firm belief, unaccompanied by substantial doubt, that he was not licensed or privileged to be on the property.
A statement offered to show its effect upon the state of mind of the listener, rather than the truth of the matter asserted, is not hearsay.

Interest of A.K., et al. (Confidential) 2005 ND App3
Docket No.: 20040313
Filing Date: 5/10/2005
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The State must prove the elements for termination of parental rights by clear and convincing evidence.
In determining whether the causes and conditions of deprivation will continue or will not be remedied, there must be prognostic evidence forming the basis for reasonable prediction of continued or future deprivation.

Kerzmann v. Burleigh County Social Services 2005 ND App7
Docket No.: 20050076
Filing Date: 6/30/2005
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Administrative Proceeding
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The district court's dismissal of an attempted appeal because the appeal from an administrative law judge's decision affirming an agency employment termination was not properly perfected under N.D.C.C. 28-32-42 is summarily affirmed.

Gosbee v. Martinson, et al. 2005 ND App10
Docket No.: 20050056
Filing Date: 7/6/2005
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author:

Highlight: Rule 54(e)(1), N.D.R.Civ.P., which provides that the trial court shall schedule a hearing when objections to costs and disbursements are filed, is mandatory and affords no discretion to the trial court to dispense with the required hearing unless it is expressly waived by the parties.
When a motion is submitted under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2 and oral argument is properly requested, the trial court has no discretion to refuse to hold a hearing.
When a trial court has erroneously failed to provide a required hearing, the appropriate remedy is a remand for a hearing.