Opinions

GEM Razorback, LLC v. Zenergy, Inc. 2017 ND 33
Docket No.: 20160170
Filing Date: 2/21/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: Dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is appropriate if the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
The parol evidence rule applies only to parties to a contract, and the rule has no application to a third person who is not a party to the contract or who is not attempting to enforce rights under the contract.

Golberg v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation 2017 ND 32
Docket No.: 20160218
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Suspension of driving privileges is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Snider, et al. v. Dickinson Elks Building, LLC, et al. 2017 ND 31
Docket No.: 20160145
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A construction lien created as a matter of law ceases to exist for failure to comply with the limitations periods provided in the construction lien statutes.

Wojahn v. Levi 2017 ND 30
Docket No.: 20140315
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment affirming a Department of Transportation hearing officer's decision suspending driving privileges is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Beylund v. Levi 2017 ND 30
Docket No.: 20140133
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The implied consent laws do not violate the Fourth Amendment, under the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions.

Cody v. State 2017 ND 29
Docket No.: 20160138
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: When a defendant applies for post-conviction relief without requesting an evidentiary hearing and the State does not move for summary disposition in its response, the district court does not err by considering information outside the application in denying the defendant's application on the merits without holding an evidentiary hearing after the defendant received notice and an opportunity to present evidence.

Interest of Nelson 2017 ND 28
Docket No.: 20160113
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: For civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual, substantive due process requires proof that the individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior.
The district court must specifically state the facts on which it relied to determine that an individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior.

Hoverson v. Hoverson (cross-ref.w/20120281 & 20140198) 2017 ND 27
Docket No.: 20160175
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: Interpretation of a judgment is a question of law, and an unambiguous judgment may not be modified, enlarged, restricted, or diminished.
The question whether a judgment is ambiguous is a question of law. There is an ambiguity when language can be reasonably construed as having at least two alternative meanings.
A district court may clarify a divorce judgment if the judgment is vague, uncertain, or ambiguous.

Klein, et al. v. Sletto, et al. 2017 ND 26
Docket No.: 20160048
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A contract for the sale of property is invalid unless it is in writing.

Burk v. State of North Dakota, et al. 2017 ND 25
Docket No.: 20160108
Filing Date: 2/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Tax Realted
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A settlement agreement is a contract and the parties' rights and responsibilities are limited by the terms of the agreement.
When the language of a contract is plain and unambiguous and the parties' intentions can be ascertained from the writing alone, extrinsic evidence is inadmissible to alter, vary, explain or change the document.