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.
1561 - 1570 of 12235 results
|
Vacancy in Judgeship No. 6, South Central Judicial District (consol. 20190346)
2019 ND 305 |
|
Vacancy in Judgeship No. 7, South Central Judicial District (consol. 20190371)
2019 ND 305 |
|
Interest of G.L.D. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 304 |
|
Rath v. Rath
2019 ND 303 Highlight: District court orders denying a motion for an extension, denying a motion to amend the parenting plan and child support, and denying a motion for relief from order and new trial are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(4). |
|
Interest of Voisine
2019 ND 302 Highlight: The evidence does not support the conclusion that the civilly committed resident remains a sexually dangerous individual and is clearly erroneous. The order denying the petition for discharge is reversed. |
|
Lessard v. Johnson
2019 ND 301
Highlight: A district court has discretion in deciding whether to grant a new trial under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59. |
|
State v. Komrosky
2019 ND 300
Highlight: Warrantless discovery of evidence in a defendant’s home is justified under the emergency exception to the warrant requirement if entry was actually motivated by a perceived need to render aid or assistance. |
|
Thomas v. Thomas
2019 ND 299 Highlight: Section 14-09-06.2(1)(j), N.D.C.C, creates a rebuttable presumption against awarding custody of a child to a perpetrator of domestic violence if certain criteria is met. A district court is not bound to accept stipulations regarding custody and care of children if it finds the stipulations are not in the best interests of the child. A district court’s findings and conclusions regarding the presumption and stipulations should be sufficiently detailed to allow this Court to understand the basis for its decision. |
|
State v. Rose
2019 ND 298
Highlight: Statutes are generally not retroactive unless the legislature expressly declares so. |
|
Edwardson v. State
2019 ND 297
Highlight: Whether a petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact and is fully reviewable on appeal. The district court’s findings of fact will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous. |