Opinions

Schoenberg v. Schoenberg 2024 ND 148
Docket No.: 20240044
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Under the residual exception to the hearsay rule, a hearsay statement is admissible if the statement is supported by sufficient guarantees of trustworthiness and it is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence that the proponent can obtain through reasonable efforts. The proponent failed to show that a letter containing hearsay statements from the children is more probative than affidavits or declarations from the children, or that the affidavits or declarations could not have been obtained through reasonable efforts.

If more than two years have passed since the court entered judgment establishing residential responsibility, a prima facie case consists of factual allegations sufficient to support a finding of a material change in circumstances and that a change is necessary to serve the best interests of the child. The changed circumstances must have adversely affected the child, or there must have been a general decline in the condition of the child. A significant other moving into the home and counseling are material changes in circumstances. The moving party failed to show the changed circumstances adversely affected the children or that there has been a general decline in the condition of the children.

Ritter v. Ritter 2024 ND 147
Docket No.: 20240041
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A trial court's property valuations and division of the parties' assets and debts, and refinancing of debts are findings of fact subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review.

A trial court may weigh spouses' competing testimony on the value of marital property. A trial court's valuation of marital property is not clearly erroneous if the findings are within the range of evidence provided.

Whether a trial court includes an indemnity provision in a divorce judgment is dependent upon the facts of the case, subject to the clearly erroneous standard.

When determining whether to award spousal support, the trial court must consider the Ruff-Fischer guidelines, the needs of the spouse seeking support, and the ability of the other spouse to pay.

Under the child support guidelines, a district court may average an obligor's income when calculating his or her income for child support purposes if the obligor has a fluctuating income. The guidelines specifically provide where gross income is subject to fluctuation, information reflecting and covering a period of time sufficient to reveal the likely extent of fluctuations must be provided.

State v. Juneau 2024 ND 146
Docket No.: 20230314
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A jury verdict finding a defendant guilty of robbery under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-22-01(2) while simultaneously determining he did not direct the force of a deadly weapon against the victim is legally inconsistent.

Interest of H.W. 2024 ND 145
Docket No.: 20240172
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Mental Health
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Orders for hospitalization and involuntary treatment with medication are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Warner v. Warner 2024 ND 144
Docket No.: 20240047
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Under N.D.C.C. § 14-09.1-07, a family law mediation agreement is not binding upon the parties until approved by order of the court.

The district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the defendant's motion to set aside the judgment.

Wootan v. State 2024 ND 143
Docket No.: 20240025
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

State v. Ritter 2024 ND 142
Docket No.: 20230337
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury conviction of sexual assault is reversed because the district court abused its discretion by admitting video of a forensic interview without weighing the probative value against the prejudicial effect.

A court is vested with discretion to decide whether a party has opened the door for the admission of otherwise inadmissible evidence, but opening the door for the admission of otherwise inadmissible evidence is not unlimited.

A court must first consider whether and to what extent the door has been opened regarding a particular topic. When the door has been opened, the court must also consider, under N.D.R.Ev. 403, whether the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury.

Gerszewski v. Rostvet (consolidated w/20230362 & 20230363) 2024 ND 141
Docket No.: 20230361
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A court may grant a disorderly conduct restraining order when a petitioner establishes, by reasonable grounds, that the respondent engaged in disorderly conduct. Disorderly conduct is defined as intrusive or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another person. Reasonable grounds is synonymous with probable cause. A trespass is not disorderly conduct if there is no intent to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another.

A district court may take judicial notice on its own of facts that are generally known within the court's territorial jurisdiction or facts that can be accurately determined from sources which cannot reasonably be questioned. When a district court takes judicial notice before notifying the parties, the parties, on request, are entitled to be heard.

The purpose of an appeal is to review the actions of the trial court, not to grant the appellant an opportunity to develop and expound upon new strategies or theories. The requirement that a party first present an issue to the trial court, as a precondition to raising it on appeal, gives that court a meaningful opportunity to make a correct decision, contributes valuable input to the process, and develops the record for effective review of the decision.

Rostvet v. Gerszewski (consolidated w/20230361 & 20230363) 2024 ND 141
Docket No.: 20230362
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A court may grant a disorderly conduct restraining order when a petitioner establishes, by reasonable grounds, that the respondent engaged in disorderly conduct. Disorderly conduct is defined as intrusive or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another person. Reasonable grounds is synonymous with probable cause. A trespass is not disorderly conduct if there is no intent to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another.

A district court may take judicial notice on its own of facts that are generally known within the court's territorial jurisdiction or facts that can be accurately determined from sources which cannot reasonably be questioned. When a district court takes judicial notice before notifying the parties, the parties, on request, are entitled to be heard.

The purpose of an appeal is to review the actions of the trial court, not to grant the appellant an opportunity to develop and expound upon new strategies or theories. The requirement that a party first present an issue to the trial court, as a precondition to raising it on appeal, gives that court a meaningful opportunity to make a correct decision, contributes valuable input to the process, and develops the record for effective review of the decision.

Rostvet v. Gerszewski (consolidated w/20230361 & 20230362) 2024 ND 141
Docket No.: 20230363
Filing Date: 7/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A court may grant a disorderly conduct restraining order when a petitioner establishes, by reasonable grounds, that the respondent engaged in disorderly conduct. Disorderly conduct is defined as intrusive or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another person. Reasonable grounds is synonymous with probable cause. A trespass is not disorderly conduct if there is no intent to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another.

A district court may take judicial notice on its own of facts that are generally known within the court's territorial jurisdiction or facts that can be accurately determined from sources which cannot reasonably be questioned. When a district court takes judicial notice before notifying the parties, the parties, on request, are entitled to be heard.

The purpose of an appeal is to review the actions of the trial court, not to grant the appellant an opportunity to develop and expound upon new strategies or theories. The requirement that a party first present an issue to the trial court, as a precondition to raising it on appeal, gives that court a meaningful opportunity to make a correct decision, contributes valuable input to the process, and develops the record for effective review of the decision.