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.
1911 - 1920 of 12446 results
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. |