Opinions

State v. Shick 2017 ND 134
Docket No.: 20160298
Filing Date: 6/7/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: When a party objects to the State's admission of evidence with a pretrial motion in limine, the party must renew their objection at trial in order to give the district court an opportunity to rule on the issue in the trial context. A party's failure to renew their objection at trial acts as a waiver of the claim of error.
The district court may permit the State to amend an information at any time before the verdict or finding unless an additional or different offense is charged or a substantial right of the defendant is prejudiced.

Marman v. Levi 2017 ND 133
Docket No.: 20160217
Filing Date: 6/7/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: The odor of an alcoholic beverage, poor balance, and open containers of alcohol may permit an officer to reasonably formulate an opinion the body of a driver in a single-car crash contains alcohol.

Hageness, et al. v. Davis, et al. 2017 ND 132
Docket No.: 20160167
Filing Date: 6/7/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A party is barred from bringing an action for the recovery or possession of real property, unless the party was seized or possessed of the property within twenty years before bringing the action.
The statutory twenty-year period is measured back from the commencement of the action.

State v. Raphael 2017 ND 131
Docket No.: 20160447
Filing Date: 6/7/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Criminal judgment for possession of a controlled substance is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Junas v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation 2017 ND 130
Docket No.: 20160440
Filing Date: 6/7/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Suspension of driving privileges summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5) and (7), Beylund v. Levi, 2017 ND 30, 889 N.W.2d 907, and Barrios-Flores v. Levi, 2017 ND 117.

State v. Smith 2017 ND 129
Docket No.: 20170022
Filing Date: 6/7/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Criminal judgment entered after district court found a defendant guilty of aggravated assault - domestic violence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.p. 35.1(a)(3).

Rath v. Rath (cross ref w/ 20130025, 20130184, 20130327, 20140012, 20140291, 2017 ND 128
Docket No.: 20160222
Filing Date: 5/19/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: Although reviewable on appeal from a final judgment, orders denying demands for change of judge are interlocutory and not appealable.
A district court's contempt decision will only be disturbed on appeal if the court abused its discretion.
A denial of a motion for reconsideration will not be reversed on appeal absent a manifest abuse of discretion.<Br>

Sorenson, et al. v. Bakken Investments, LLC, et al. 2017 ND 127
Docket No.: 20160319
Filing Date: 5/18/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Only a person having an interest in, or claiming an interest in, real property may challenge a court's rulings in a quiet title action.

State v. Ayala 2017 ND 126
Docket No.: 20160369
Filing Date: 5/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Section 39-20-01, N.D.C.C., requires law enforcement officers to convey the implied-consent advisory in an objectively reasonable way calculated to be comprehensible to the driver.

Johnson v. Johnson 2017 ND 125
Docket No.: 20170010
Filing Date: 5/16/2017
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A party cannot rely on the other party's request for an oral argument to guarantee himself or herself an oral argument.
In allotting the tax exemptions of children to the parties it may be prudent to place the exemptions in the hands of the party who will benefit most, but the district court is not required to do so.