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.
1801 - 1900 of 12426 results
|
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. |
|
Skaw ND Precast, LLC v. Oil Capital Ready Mix, LLC, et al.
2019 ND 296
Highlight: When a lessor sells property that is subject to an unfulfilled lease, the buyer takes the property subject to the terms of the lease. |
|
Open Road Trucking v. Swanson, et al.
2019 ND 295 Highlight: A judgment debtor who pays more than his or her proportionate share of a judgment may take an assignment of the judgment for the purpose of enforcing contribution against co-debtors. |
|
WSI v. Salat, et al.
2019 ND 294 Highlight: A reasoning mind could reasonably determine the claimant was unable to work and earn as much as he earned at the time of his injury and the claimant suffered low back pain that was attributable to the compensable work injury after November 11, 2016. |
|
Lindstrom v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 293 Highlight: A reasoning mind could have reasonably found a report and notice was forwarded to the Department within five days of the issuance of the temporary operator’s permit as required by law. The hearing officer’s decision to suspend the appellant’s license for 180 days is affirmed. |
|
State v. Walker
2019 ND 292 Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered restitution against a defendant who pled guilty to theft for possession of a stolen motorcycle, and that motorcycle was returned damaged to the victim. |
|
Stein v. State
2019 ND 291 Highlight: A district court was not clearly erroneous in denying the application for post-conviction relief. |
|
State v. Comes
2019 ND 290 Highlight: When both N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-09.1 and N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-01(1) apply to a defendant’s sentence, the defendant is not eligible for parole until eighty-five percent of the sentence has been served or thirty years after admission to the penitentiary, whichever is greater. |
|
State ex rel. City of Marion v. Alber
2019 ND 289
Highlight: Res judicata principles prohibit the review of arguments raised in earlier appeals. |
|
Neutman v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 288 Highlight: A district court judgment is summarily reversed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(b). |
|
Jesser v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 287 Highlight: A driver’s limited post-arrest statutory right to counsel does not apply prior to arrest, and the holding in Kuntz v. State Highway Commissioner, 405 N.W.2d 285 (N.D. 1987) is not extended to N.D.C.C. § 39-20-14. |
|
City of Fargo v. Wieland
2019 ND 286
Highlight: Flood control projects are a public use for eminent domain purposes. |
|
Lebeau v. State
2019 ND 285 Highlight: An order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(4). |
|
State v. Dubois
2019 ND 284 Highlight: A district court is authorized to revoke probation for a violation prior to expiration or termination of probation under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6). A court has discretion in sentencing and need not explicitly reference the statutory sentence factors when fixing a sentence. Section 12.1-32-07(6), N.D.C.C., permits a district court to impose any sentence available at the initial time of sentencing upon revocation of probation. Issues not raised in the district court cannot generally be raised for the first time on appeal, absent obvious error. |
|
State v. Pailing
2019 ND 283 Highlight: A district court did not violate the defendant’s due process rights or abuse its discretion in overruling the defendant’s objection and denying the motion for mistrial concerning the State’s anecdote during closing argument. |
|
State Tax Commissioner v. Bosset
2019 ND 282 Highlight: A district court summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (6) and (7). |
|
Wilber v. Scaff
2019 ND 281 Highlight: A district court judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Continental Resources v. N.D. Dep't. of Environmental Quality
2019 ND 280 Highlight: Where the legislature has deferred to an administrative agency’s expertise to develop rules, and has declined to provide clear direction on the substance of the rules to be developed, the “purely legal question” exception to the exhaustion of administrative remedies does not apply. |
|
Saastad v. Saastad
2019 ND 279
Highlight: A district court’s award of primary residential responsibility is a finding of fact, which will not be reversed on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous. |
|
State v. Job
2019 ND 278 Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea. |
|
Matter of O.H.W. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 277 Highlight: A district court’s order denying a petition for discharge from commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Legare
2019 ND 276 Highlight: An Alford plea does not preserve non-jurisdictional claims for appeal. |
|
Krump-Wooton v. Krump
2019 ND 275 Highlight: A district court’s judgment denying a motion to modify parenting time and a motion to modify primary residential responsibility is affirmed. |
|
State v. Maines (consolidated w/20180396)
2019 ND 274 Highlight: A district court may extend an offenders’ sentence if the offender is found to be a habitual offender under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-09. Section 12.1-32-02(9), N.D.C.C., does not apply to an offender’s out of state felony convictions for purposes of determining if the offender is a habitual offender. Section 12.1-32-09, N.D.C.C., specifically refers to convictions in another state and defines a felony in another state as one that is punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of five years or more, regardless of the actual punishment imposed. |
|
Hughes v. Olheiser Masonry, et al.
2019 ND 273 Highlight: Delivery is not accomplished at the time of mailing the summons and complaint to the sheriff’s department under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-38. An attempt to commence an action is not the equivalent to commencement when the summons is not delivered to the sheriff within the statute of limitations. |
|
Interest of J.T.L.D. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 272 Highlight: Order terminating father’s parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Dubois
2019 ND 271 Highlight: A district court’s order revoking probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Wolf v. Wolf, et al.
2019 ND 270 Highlight: The district court’s judgment modifying parenting time is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Watkins v. State
2019 ND 269 Highlight: The order denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Broten v. Carter, et al.
2019 ND 268
Highlight: The two year statute of limitations for malpractice claims begins to run when the client discovers his attorney’s negligence and suffers some damage. |
|
Kemmet v. Steiner, et al.
2019 ND 267 Highlight: A district court judgment is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
|
State v. Buchanan
2019 ND 266 Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
State v. Wallace
2019 ND 265 Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3),(4). |
|
Matter of Emelia Hirsch Trust
2019 ND 264 Highlight: An order denying a motion to vacate and terminate a trust is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Matter of Didier
2019 ND 263 Highlight: A district court must find a sexually dangerous individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Past conduct is relevant and may be taken into account with present conduct to determine if an individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Inappropriate behavior not deemed actual misconduct requiring a formal sanction may be considered in determining an inability to control behavior. Conduct showing more than just a lack of progress, but a lack of participation, is sufficient to show an individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. |
|
State v. Vetter
2019 ND 262
Highlight: Under N.D.R.Ev. 201(b)(2), a court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. |
|
Fettig v. Fettig, et al. (consolidated w/ 20190103)
2019 ND 261
Highlight: Real property can be gifted to a minor if there is an intention by the donor to then and there give the property to the donee, coupled with an actual or constructive delivery of the property to the donee, and acceptance of the property by the donee. |
|
State v. Pittenger
2019 ND 260 Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). |
|
State v. Baltrusch
2019 ND 259
Highlight: To support a claim of insufficient evidence to support a conviction, the defendant bears the burden of showing the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, reveals no reasonable inference of guilt. |
|
Interest of J.B. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 258
Highlight: When a committed individual petitions for discharge from commitment as a sexually dangerous individual, the State must prove the individual remains a sexually dangerous individual by clear and convincing evidence. |
|
Estate of Blikre
2019 ND 257
Highlight: A holographic will is valid if the signature and material portions of the document are in the testator’s handwriting. |
|
State v. G.C.H.
2019 ND 256 Highlight: The question of law certified by a North Dakota district court is not answered because it is not dispositive of the case. The North Dakota Supreme Court exercises supervisory jurisdiction to reverse the district court’s order finding a 16 and 17 year old married person was not a “child” under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-02(4)(b) when the offenses allegedly were committed. Reversed and remanded with directions to vacate the judgment and dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. |
|
Interest of K.V. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 255 Highlight: Juvenile court findings of delinquency for fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer and reckless driving are not clearly erroneous and are affirmed. A juvenile court finding of delinquency for criminal trespass is reversed due to insufficient evidence. |
|
State v. Grzadzieleski
2019 ND 254
Highlight: The State may not appeal from an in limine order excluding evidence based on the physician-patient privilege under N.D.R.Ev. 503. |
|
Interest of D.V.A. (Confidential)
2019 ND 253 Highlight: A district court order denying discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Rocky Mountain Steel Foundations. v. Brockett Company, et al.
2019 ND 252 Highlight: A lienholder who recovers in a suit upon a bond is entitled to recover a reasonable attorney’s fee for the proceedings before the district court and for a successful appeal. |
|
Clarke v. Taylor
2019 ND 251 Highlight: A district court’s domestic violence protection order is affirmed. |
|
State v. Ruddell
2019 ND 250 Highlight: District court criminal judgment summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Huerd v. General Motors, LLC
2019 ND 249 Highlight: An action brought in small claims court is subject to the doctrine of res judicata. A small claims court’s judgment cannot be appealed in district court. Unless requested by a party, oral argument on a motion under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2 is not required. |
|
Herman v. Herman, et al.
2019 ND 248
Highlight: N.D.C.C. § 59-10.1-03(1) requires receipt of the notice, proven through the presumption or otherwise, to begin the 120 day limitation period. The presumption under N.D.C.C. § 59-10.1-03(1) is rebuttable. |
|
Interest of G.T. (CONFIDENTIAL)(consol. w/20190258-20190260 & 20190265-20190268)
2019 ND 247 Highlight: Orders terminating mother, father, and John Doe’s parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(4), and (7). |
|
State v. Tyler
2019 ND 246 Highlight: When a party moves for a mistrial because of an unavailable witness who already testified and neither party is at fault, the movant must make an offer of proof to provide a record of what additional testimony the witness would provide and why the additional testimony is material. |
|
Ramirez v. Houge, et al.
2019 ND 245 Highlight: District court judgment affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (2), and (4). |
|
First National Bank of Omaha v. Young
2019 ND 244 Highlight: A district court summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
|
Trulson, et al. v. Meiers, et al.
2019 ND 243
Highlight: Whether there was delivery of a deed is a question of fact. |
|
Carlson v. State
2019 ND 242 Highlight: The order denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Gregory
2019 ND 241
Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). Sufficient evidence exists that could allow a jury to draw a reasonable inference in favor of conviction of manslaughter. |
|
Brock v. Price, et al.
2019 ND 240
Highlight: A district court may revise any non-final order before entry of a final judgment and has discretion to extend deadlines in its scheduling order before trial. |
|
State v. Smith
2019 ND 239
Highlight: A defendant’s failure to object at trial to character evidence or evidence of alleged prior bad acts under N.D.R.Ev. 404 forfeits the claim of error. |
|
State v. Gray
2019 ND 238 Highlight: District court judgment summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Whetsel v. State
2019 ND 237 Highlight: A district court order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Vogt
2019 ND 236
Highlight: A defendant seeking post-conviction relief cannot circumvent the Uniform Postconviction Procedure Act by designating his application for post-conviction relief as a motion under a rule of criminal procedure or by filing his motion in his criminal file, rather than filing an application for post-conviction relief. |
|
Interest of G.D-M. (CONFIDENTIAL) (consol. w/ 20190233)
2019 ND 235 Highlight: Orders terminating father’s parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Cichos, et al. v. Dakota Eye Institute, P.C., et al.
2019 ND 234 Highlight: For public policy reasons, there is no third-party duty owed by a physician to warn a patient of the danger of driving with a latent condition. A purely economic claim against a physician based on indemnity for medical malpractice is assignable from a patient to a third party who was injured as a result of the malpractice. Under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46, an affidavit has a low threshold to meet the requirements. |
|
Franciere v. City of Mandan (Cross-referenced)
2019 ND 233 Highlight: A district court must rule on a motion to dismiss for insufficiency of service and lack of personal jurisdiction before adjudicating the merits of a claim. |
|
Interest of Hoff
2019 ND 232 Highlight: A district court order denying discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Alvarado v. N.D. Dept. of Transportation
2019 ND 231 Highlight: Without a valid request for testing, including a valid advisory, there can be no refusal to submit to testing under N.D.C.C. §§ 39-20-01(3)(a) or 39-08-01(2). |
|
Larson, et al. v. Tonneson, et al.
2019 ND 230
Highlight: In an appeal from a bench trial, the district court’s findings of fact are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review, and its conclusions of law are fully reviewable. |
|
State v. Greenshields
2019 ND 229 Highlight: When the dismissal of a criminal count or entire complaint is silent whether it is with or without prejudice, it is ambiguous and examination of the parties and the district court’s intent is required. |
|
Pennington, et al. v. Continental Resources, Inc.
2019 ND 228
Highlight: Oil and gas leases are interpreted as a whole to give effect to every part if reasonably practicable. |
|
State v. Johns
2019 ND 227 Highlight: A completed deferred imposition of sentence that has resulted in dismissal of the charge involving a prior conviction under N.D.C.C. title 19-03.4 can not be used to enhance a subsequent charge of unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia. |
|
Plains Trucking, LLC v. Cresap, et al.
2019 ND 226
Highlight: The supreme court exercises its authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously, and only to rectify errors and prevent injustice in extraordinary cases in which there is no adequate alternative remedy. |
|
Plains Trucking, LLC v. Hagar, et al.
2019 ND 226
Highlight: The supreme court exercises its authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously, and only to rectify errors and prevent injustice in extraordinary cases in which there is no adequate alternative remedy. |
|
Baker v. Baker
2019 ND 225
Highlight: On a motion to modify primary residential responsibility, a district court must accept the truth of the moving party’s allegations unless an opposing affidavit conclusively establishes the movant’s allegations have no credibility. |
|
City of Bismarck v. Vagts
2019 ND 224
Highlight: A law enforcement officer’s approach of a parked vehicle is not a seizure if the officer inquires of the occupant in a conversational manner, does not order the person do something, and does not demand a response. |
|
Kalmio v. State
2019 ND 223
Highlight: Whether a petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact and is fully reviewable on appeal. Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a), the district court’s findings of fact will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous. |
|
State v. Hoehn
2019 ND 222 Highlight: For a defendant to qualify as a dangerous special offender, the prior and current offenses must be similar. To determine whether two offenses are similar, the court must compare the elements of the two statutes and may also compare the conduct underlying the two offenses. If neither the elements nor the facts of the prior offense are similar to those of the current offense, the defendant does not qualify as a dangerous special offender. |
|
Nelson, et al. v. Nelson, et al.
2019 ND 221
Highlight: A district court has broad discretion to impose sanctions for discovery abuses, including striking pleadings or dismissing claims. |
|
WSI v. Taylor, et al.
2019 ND 220
Highlight: Courts must construe statutes to give meaning to them in their entirety if possible. |
|
North Dakota Private Investigative and Security Board v. TigerSwan, LLC, et al.
2019 ND 219
Highlight: A district court’s denial of a request for additional time for discovery will not be overturned on appeal unless the court abused its discretion. |
|
State v. Kenny
2019 ND 218
Highlight: The constitutionality of a statute is a question of law, and the statute will be upheld unless its challenger can demonstrate the statute’s unconstitutionality. The doctrine of overbreadth prohibits a law from criminalizing constitutionally protected activity. |
|
In re Anderson
2019 ND 217
Highlight: The Court answers a certified question from the Federal Bankruptcy Court regarding the application of the homestead exemption as applied to property held in joint tenancy by debtor and nondebtor spouse. |
|
State v. Casson
2019 ND 216 Highlight: Although a law enforcement officer’s encounter with the occupant of a vehicle and indication that a K-9 unit would be called to “sniff” the vehicle was a seizure, the intrusion of the occupant’s Fourth Amendment rights was warranted and scope of the intrusion was reasonably related to the circumstances which justified the intrusion. |
|
State v. Poulor
2019 ND 215
Highlight: The admission into evidence of a witness’s out-of-court testimonial statements does not violate the Confrontation Clause if a defendant has an opportunity to cross-examine a witness at trial. |
|
Chase v. State
2019 ND 214
Highlight: Applicant alleging ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel cannot circumvent the Uniform Postconviction Procedure Act’s bar on challenging post-conviction counsel’s representation by making his allegations in a motion rather than an application for post-conviction relief. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Bolinske (consolidated with 20190110)
2019 ND 213
Highlight: A lawyer is publicly reprimanded, ordered to pay partial costs of the disciplinary proceedings, and ordered to refund money to a client for violating N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.16(e). |
|
Chambering New District Judgeship in the SCJD
2019 ND 212 Highlight: New judgeship No. 10 in the South Centeral Judicial District is chambered in Mandan. |
|
Zuo v. Wang
2019 ND 211
Highlight: A district court has wide discretion to admit or exclude evidence at trial. |
|
Kovalevich v. State (Consolidated w/ 20190025)
2019 ND 210 Highlight: To prevail on a motion for a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered evidence, a defendant must show: (1) the evidence was discovered after trial, (2) the failure to learn about the evidence at the time of trial was not the result of the defendant’s lack of diligence, (3) the newly discovered evidence is material to the issues at trial, and (4) the weight and quality of the newly discovered evidence would likely result in an acquittal. |
|
Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Scher
2019 ND 209 Highlight: Lawyer disbarred. |
|
Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Rosso
2019 ND 208 Highlight: Lawyer suspended. |
|
SWMO, LLC v. Eagle Rigid Spans Inc., et al.
2019 ND 207
Highlight: On a motion for summary judgment, a court may not weigh the evidence, determine credibility or attempt to discern the truth of the matter. |
|
State v. Morales
2019 ND 206
Highlight: Denial of the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial without having considered the Waller factors is a structural error. When examining the scope of closure of a trial, special awareness should be given to whether both the public and jury must be excluded, or only the jury, and the scope should be adjusted accordingly. |
|
Rodenburg Law Firm v. Sira, et al.
2019 ND 205
Highlight: The elements of an abuse-of-process claim are an ulterior purpose and a willful act in the use of process not proper in the regular conduct of the proceeding. |