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.
1901 - 2000 of 12382 results
|
State v. Landrus
2019 ND 162
Highlight: A district court’s use of a defense of property jury instruction did not improperly shift the burden of the State to disprove the absence of self-defense. |
|
City of West Fargo v. Williams
2019 ND 161
Highlight: The right to an additional independent test under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-02 only arises when the driver submits to the chemical test requested by law enforcement. |
|
Klundt v. Benjamin
2019 ND 160
Highlight: The district court’s findings on the best interest factors, as well as its decision regarding primary residential responsibility, were not clearly erroneous. |
|
State v. Muhammad
2019 ND 159
Highlight: The district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the recordings of an interrogation without playing the recordings in their entirety. |
|
Interiors by France v. Mitzel Contractors, Inc., et al.
2019 ND 158 Highlight: An award of attorney fees to a prevailing plaintiff under N.D.C.C. § 27-08.1-04 does not extend to parties who were not part of the original small claims court proceedings. |
|
State v. Pemberton (consolidated w/ 20180415)
2019 ND 157
Highlight: Defendant failed to support his claim that a probable cause finding for a non-cognizable offense was obvious error. |
|
Hoffman v. Jevne
2019 ND 156
Highlight: If a party bringing a motion under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2 timely requests oral argument, the request must be granted. |
|
Wolt v. Wolt, et al.
2019 ND 155
Highlight: Although N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-01(10) describes activities that are considered self-employment, the determination of a self-employed individual’s income is governed by N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-05. |
|
Puklich v. Puklich, et al.
2019 ND 154
Highlight: A district court’s findings on valuation of property will not be reversed unless they are clearly erroneous. |
|
Bridgeford v. Sorel
2019 ND 153
Highlight: An officer’s actions remained within the community caretaker exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment when he knocked on the car window of an individual who appeared to be sleeping with the car running in a gas station parking lot. |
|
State v. Taylor
2019 ND 152 Highlight: Appeal from an order denying a motion for new trial is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
City of Dickinson v. Vaagen
2019 ND 151
Highlight: A criminal judgment finding defendant guilty of driving under the influence is summarily reversed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(b). |
|
Schatz v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 150 Highlight: District court’s judgment affirming a North Dakota Department of Transportation decision suspending driving privileges is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
|
Everett v. State
2019 ND 149
Highlight: In post-conviction relief proceedings, it is not an abuse of discretion to deny default judgment when a petitioner cannot show he suffered any prejudice from the State's untimely response. |
|
Blackcloud v. State
2019 ND 148
Highlight: A district court order denying application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Frontier Fiscal Services LLC v. Pinky's Aggregates, Inc., et al.
2019 ND 147
Highlight: The burden of proof ordinarily rests with the party who possesses the facts on the issue in dispute. |
|
Atkins v. State
2019 ND 146
Highlight: An applicant for post-conviction relief should have 14 days to respond to a motion to dismiss under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a)(2). |
|
State v. Atkins
2019 ND 145
Highlight: A defendant may not avoid the procedures of the Uniform Postconviction Procedure Act by designating his motion under a rule of criminal procedure or by filing his motion in his criminal file, rather than filing as a new action for post-conviction relief. |
|
Swenson, et al. v. Mahlum, et al.
2019 ND 144
Highlight: Order and judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims with prejudice and defendant’s third-party claims without prejudice was appealable because plaintiff’s claims were adjudicated and third-party claims were dependent on plaintiff’s claims. |
|
James Vault & Precast Co., et al. v. B&B Hot Oil Service, Inc., et al.
2019 ND 143 Highlight: A contractual provision purporting to exempt anyone from responsibility for a willful or negligent violation of the law is against the policy of law and not enforceable. |
|
Lee v. Lee
2019 ND 142
Highlight: The district court’s property valuations were not clearly erroneous. |
|
Estate of Hogen
2019 ND 141
Highlight: A probate court has inherent authority to control its docket and to protect its jurisdiction and judgments, the integrity of the court, and the orderly and expeditious administration of justice, and may award attorney fees to further that end. |
|
State v. Peterson
2019 ND 140
Highlight: A district court found a sufficient factual basis to support the defendant’s guilty plea based on the record and the State’s offer of proof. |
|
Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. v. Behm
2019 ND 139
Highlight: Where eminent domain is exercised by a utility business, condemnation for service to a single industrial customer does not forestall a finding that the taking is for a public use. |
|
State v. Vetter
2019 ND 138
Highlight: A traffic stop is not expanded by incidental questions the officer asks without reasonable suspicion so long as they occur prior to the completion of the stop and the officer does not deliberately delay completion of the stop. |
|
Morales v. State
2019 ND 137
Highlight: Summary dismissal of a post-conviction application for ineffective assistance of counsel is appropriate if the applicant does not claim that, but for his attorney’s errors, he would have insisted on going to trial. |
|
Watford City Lodging LLC v. Miskin
2019 ND 136
Highlight: In summary eviction proceedings, the right to possession of the property is the only fact that can be litigated unless damages or rent is claimed. |
|
Olson v. State
2019 ND 135
Highlight: Accomplice to murder under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life is a cognizable offense under North Dakota law. |
|
State v. Vigen
2019 ND 134 Highlight: An informed consent advisory omitting statutory language regarding refusal to submit to a urine test does not comply with N.D.C.C. § 39-20-01(3)(a). |
|
Ortega v. Sanford Bismarck, et al.
2019 ND 133
Highlight: The purpose of the expert opinion affidavit requirement under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46 is to screen totally unsupported claims and to prevent protracted litigation when a medical malpractice plaintiff cannot substantiate a basis for the claim. |
|
Sutton v. N.D. Dept. of Transportation
2019 ND 132
Highlight: Checking the boxes denoting an odor of alcohol and refusal of chemical testing, in combination with a note in the explanation box stating the driver declined field sobriety tests, is sufficient to render the Report and Notice Form adequate under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-04. |
|
Bride v. Trinity Hospital, et al.
2019 ND 131
Highlight: A dismissal without prejudice is appealable if the statute of limitations has expired on the plaintiff’s claim, foreclosing further litigation in this state. |
|
Nodak Mutual Insurance Company v. Steffes, et al.
2019 ND 130
Highlight: An order granting a new trial is not reviewable without N.D.Civ.P. 54(b) certification. |
|
Heartland State Bank v. Larson, et al.
2019 ND 129
Highlight: A creditor must strictly comply with the statutory provisions relating to the foreclosure of a mortgage, including the provisions for notice before foreclosure. |
|
Twin City Technical LLC, et al. v. Williams County, et al.
2019 ND 128
Highlight: A county’s lease of minerals executed in violation of mandatory competitive bidding statutes renders the lease invalid. |
|
Jensen v. State
2019 ND 126
Highlight: A Rule 11(d) motion to withdraw a guilty plea, filed after entry of the criminal judgment and a stipulated dismissal of the direct appeal, is not a critical stage of the proceeding affording the movant the constitutional guarantee to counsel nor a stage of the proceeding requiring counsel under N.D.R.Crim.P. 44(a). |
|
Matter of J.M. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 125 Highlight: The State did not establish clear and convincing evidence of a nexus between J.M.’s disorder and his sexual dangerousness to others. |
|
Great Plains Royalty Corporation v. Earl Schwartz Company, et al.
2019 ND 124
Highlight: Collateral estoppel generally forecloses relitigation, in a second action based on a different claim, of a particular issue of either fact or law which was litigated and determined in a prior suit. |
|
State v. Craig
2019 ND 123
Highlight: A district court abused its discretion by scheduling a hearing on defendant’s motion and then cancelling the hearing without explanation leaving the defendant unable to complete a hearing request under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a)(3) on his own. |
|
State v. Gardner
2019 ND 122
Highlight: A claimant neither needs to be the addressee nor needs to live at the address on a package to claim a search and seizure right to the package. A claimant only needs to show a possessory interest in the package. |
|
Ali v. State
2019 ND 121 Highlight: District court’s finding that an application for post-conviction relief failed to establish counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness was not clearly erroneous. |
|
Curtiss v. State
2019 ND 120 Highlight: A district court’s order denying application for post-conviction relief and order denying motions for reconsideration and to correct a sentence are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), (6), and (7). |
|
Lavallie v. State
2019 ND 119 Highlight: A district court order summarily dismissing a post-conviction relief application is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Interest of F.M.G. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 118 Highlight: Continuing treatment order summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Johnson
2019 ND 117 Highlight: A district court’s order denying a motion to return bond is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7). |
|
Keller v. State
2019 ND 116 Highlight: Summary affirmance of district court’s denial of post-conviction relief. |
|
Interest of T.A.G. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 115 Highlight: The case is remanded for additional findings of fact on whether a person was likely to reoffend and had serious difficulty controlling behavior, as required to deny sex offender discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual. |
|
Ayling v. Sens, et al.
2019 ND 114
Highlight: An action barred by a statute of limitations generally is dismissed under the summary judgment standards of N.D.R.Civ.P. 56. |
|
Condon v. St. Alexius Medical Center, et al.
2019 ND 113
Highlight: Section 32-42-02, N.D.C.C., does not violate the equal-protection provisions of N.D. Const. art. I, § 21. |
|
Tschider v. Tschider, et al.
2019 ND 112
Highlight: A premarital agreement may be unenforceable if it is unconscionable at the time of execution, at the time of separation or marital dissolution, or at the time of enforcement. |
|
Thompson, et al. v. Johnson
2019 ND 111 Highlight: District court erred on remand by finding child support obligor underemployed without explaining why its prior determination the obligor had a gross annual income of $171,560.66 and net annual income of $113,916 was incorrect. |
|
Interest of K.S.D. (CONFIDENTIAL) (consolidated with 20180261)
2019 ND 110
Highlight: Motion to withdraw consent to termination of parental rights was untimely under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-45(6) because it was made more than thirty days after the order terminating parental rights was issued. |
|
Rhodenbaugh v. Rhodenbaugh
2019 ND 109
Highlight: Interlocutory orders in an action are merged into the final judgment and may be reviewed on appeal of the judgment. |
|
State v. Valles
2019 ND 108 Highlight: For a warrantless search or seizure to fall into the abandonment exception, the State must show evidence of abandonment was present through objective facts known to the officer at the time of the search or seizure. Further, even when a cell phone is considered abandoned, a search of its contents is always considered unreasonable and thus is not permitted without a warrant. |
|
Estate of Bartelson
2019 ND 107 Highlight: An appeal only from the denial of a motion for reconsideration does not permit the appellant to attack the underlying order from which the appeal could have been taken but was not brought. |
|
State v. Stenhoff
2019 ND 106
Highlight: Search of supervised probationer’s residence was constitutional where the probationer was incarcerated due to a probation violation, the supervised probation conditions included a search clause, and law enforcement officers had reasonable suspicion unlawful activity was afoot due to a child’s statement alluding to the presence of drugs at the probationer’s residence. |
|
State v. Odum
2019 ND 105
Highlight: Under the totality of the circumstances, probable cause existed for a search warrant based on evidence found during garbage search. |
|
Lupo v. McNeeley, et al.
2019 ND 104 Highlight: The statute of limitations of a claim for relief is not tolled by the defendant’s absence from the state under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-32 when the state’s courts can obtain jurisdiction by completing service of process by publication. |
|
Garcia v. State
2019 ND 103 Highlight: A finalized criminal sentence may not be reduced by statute. |
|
WSI v. Eight Ball Trucking, Inc., et al.
2019 ND 102
Highlight: A summary judgment entered after a defendant fails to respond to the motion for summary judgment is an adjudication on the merits and not a default judgment. |
|
State v. Mohamud
2019 ND 101
Highlight: The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to dismiss for undue delay. |
|
Lavallie v. State
2019 ND 100 Highlight: District court erred by reducing a criminal sentence based on a statute enacted after the conviction had been finalized. |
|
State v. Comes
2019 ND 99 Highlight: Rule 35, N.D.R.Crim.P., requires notice of intent to correct a sentence be given to the parties. |
|
Sabo, et al. v. Job Service
2019 ND 98
Highlight: The doctrine of administrative res judicata prevents collateral attacks on administrative agency final orders. |
|
Pavlicek v. American Steel Systems, Inc., et al.
2019 ND 97
Highlight: A district court may grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law if a party has been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial and the court finds that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the party on that issue. |
|
Heitkamp v. Kabella
2019 ND 96
Highlight: When an ambiguous contract is at issue, the parties’ intent becomes a question of fact. |
|
Cuozzo v. State, d/b/a University of North Dakota, et al.
2019 ND 95
Highlight: Board of Higher Education policies, rules and regulations adopted as part of its policy manual govern termination of university faculty members and are part of the employment contract between the institution and the faculty member. |
|
Candee, et al. v. Candee
2019 ND 94
Highlight: A district court’s decision regarding attorney fees will not be set aside on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. |
|
Horst v. Horst
2019 ND 93
Highlight: A district court judgment awarding a divorce, establishing primary residential responsibility, child support, and parenting time are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (3) and(4). |
|
Interest of C.D.C. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 92 Highlight: Appeal from an order denying motion to vacate judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
State v. Johnson
2019 ND 91 Highlight: Criminal judgment finding defendant guilty of unlawful possession of a controlled substance in violation of N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23 and unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia in violation of N.D.C.C. § 19-03.4-03 is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Turcotte
2019 ND 90 Highlight: Attorney reprimanded. |
|
Bearce, et al. v. Yellowstone Energy Development, LLC
2019 ND 89
Highlight: The proper remedy for fraud is recision of the contract. |
|
Interest of D.M.H. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 88 Highlight: When awarding a guardianship, the district court must determine whether the parents should be awarded visitation. The district court may not delegate determination of a visitation schedule. |
|
Estate of Brandt
2019 ND 87
Highlight: A personal representative is not precluded from filing petitions as an interested person in the supervised administration of an estate while simultaneously performing fiduciary duties to distribute property according to a will and the best interests of an estate. |
|
State v. Hamre
2019 ND 86 Highlight: In considering a speedy trial claim, a district court must balance the length of the delay, the reason for the delay, the accused’s assertion of the right to a speedy trial, and the prejudice to the accused. |
|
State v. Guthmiller
2019 ND 85
Highlight: A district court order denying a defendant’s motion to withdraw a guilty plea is affirmed if the defendant fails to show a “fair and just” reason for withdrawal. |
|
State v. Morsette
2019 ND 84
Highlight: A district court’s finding that the facts support a reasonable and articulable suspicion is fully reviewable on appeal. |
|
Lies v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 83
Highlight: Burden is on moving party to prove vehicle properly identified by evidence. |
|
Baker v. Autos, Inc., et al.
2019 ND 82 Highlight: A retail installment contract must disclose charges and fees that are finance charges as finance charges to comply with the disclosure requirements of the Retail Installment Sales Act. |
|
Lincoln Land Development, LLP v. City of Lincoln
2019 ND 81
Highlight: The extent of a prescriptive easement is fixed by the use through which it was created, and use beyond the easement’s originally created use may be a governmental taking. |
|
Ebach v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 80
Highlight: At a hearing under N.D.C.C. 39-20-05, the regularly kept records of the director and state crime laboratory may be introduced; once introduced, those records establish prima facie their contents without further foundation. |
|
City of Fargo v. Nikle
2019 ND 79
Highlight: An affirmative defense jury instruction will only be given if there is evidence to support it. |
|
Orwig v. Orwig (consolidated w/20170455)
2019 ND 78
Highlight: A party appealing from a contempt order must file a notice of appeal with the clerk of the supreme court within 60 days after entry of the judgment or order being appealed. |
|
Cockfield v. City of Fargo
2019 ND 77
Highlight: A public employee, who has a property interest in his employment, may not have his employment terminated without due process. |
|
Baker Boyer National Bank v. JPF Enterprises, LLC
2019 ND 76
Highlight: The relationship between a bank and its customers is a debtor-creditor relationship, which ordinarily does not impose a fiduciary duty upon the bank. |
|
Purdy v. Purdy, et al.
2019 ND 75 Highlight: A district court’s decision on a motion to modify primary residential responsibility is a finding of fact, subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review. |
|
City of Bismarck v. King
2019 ND 74 Highlight: The criminal offense of refusal to submit to chemical testing is a strict liability offense. |
|
State v. Nice
2019 ND 73
Highlight: A defendant may not challenge the constitutionality of a statute they were not charged under. |
|
State v. Laverdure
2019 ND 72 Highlight: Sufficient probable cause existed to support the magistrate’s issuance of a search warrant. |
|
State v. Rai
2019 ND 71
Highlight: District court did not err in admitting lawfully obtained text message conversation from an undercover officer’s cell phone into evidence. |
|
Chisholm v. State
2019 ND 70
Highlight: We distinguish peremptory demands for a change of judge from a demand for a change of judge based on bias. |
|
Brewer v. State
2019 ND 69 Highlight: An attorney’s failure to object to admission of evidence at trial because the attorney believes the record created in a pretrial motion in limine has preserved the issue falls outside the wide range of reasonable attorney performance. Where prejudice is also shown, such a failure to object to prior bad acts evidence at trial constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel. |
|
Becker, et al. v. Burleigh County, et al.
2019 ND 68
Highlight: Injunctive relief may be granted against public entities without exhaustion of administrative remedies where the plaintiff challenges the legality and validity of a decision rather than the public entity’s wisdom, propriety, or correctness in making the decision. |
|
Interest of Carter (cross-referenced w/20100180 & 20160236)
2019 ND 67
Highlight: A district court must find an individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior to continue that person’s commitment as a sexually dangerous individual. |
|
State v. Alberts
2019 ND 66
Highlight: Issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered unless they rise to the level of obvious error. |
|
State v. Thorsteinson
2019 ND 65
Highlight: Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith, but may be admissible to show motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. |
|
Gonzales v. WSI
2019 ND 63 Highlight: District court judgment affirming a Workforce Safety and Insurance order denying workplace injury benefits is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
|
White v. State
2019 ND 62 Highlight: District court’s finding that applicant for post-conviction relief failed to establish his counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness was not clearly erroneous. |
|
Interest of C.H. (CONFIDENTIAL) (CONSOLIDATED W/20190019-20180021)
2019 ND 61 Highlight: Juvenile court’s finding that the children were exposed to aggravated circumstances was not clearly erroneous. |