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.
1211 - 1220 of 12446 results
Pavlicek v. American Steel Systems, Inc., et al.
2022 ND 35
Docket No.: 20210116
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John
Highlight: Property damage caused by faulty workmanship is a covered occurrence under an insurance policy to the extent the faulty workmanship causes bodily injury or property damage to property other than the insured’s defective work product.
Exclusions from coverage in an insurance policy must be clear and explicit and are strictly construed against the insurer.
When a conflict exists between the provisions of an insurance policy and an attached endorsement, the provisions of the endorsement prevail.
Pavlicek v. American Steel Systems, Inc., et al.
2022 ND 35
Docket No.: 20210116
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John
State v. Willard
2022 ND 34
Docket No.: 20210203
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Crothers, Daniel John
Highlight: The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
Traffic violations, even if common or minor, provide officers with reasonable suspicion to justify a traffic stop.
The term “driveway” means “a private way of access that allows drivers to reach a private place from a public road.”
State v. Willard
2022 ND 34
Docket No.: 20210203
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Crothers, Daniel John
Goldade-Jose v. Jose, et al.
2022 ND 33
Docket No.: 20210231
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Per Curiam
Lessard v. Johnson
2022 ND 32
Docket No.: 20200206
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Jensen, Jon J.
State v. Halsey
2022 ND 31
Docket No.: 20210090
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
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
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
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.
State v. Davis
2022 ND 30
Docket No.: 20210152
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair
Orwig v. Orwig (consolidated w/20210141)
2022 ND 29
Docket No.: 20210140
Filing Date: 2/18/2022
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
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.
