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.
2931 - 2940 of 12137 results
|
State v. Beylund
2015 ND 27 Highlight: Conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Culver v. Levi
2015 ND 26 Highlight: Appeal from judgment affirming decision of the Department of Transportation to suspend driving privileges for 91 days is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
|
Haugen v. Simmons
2015 ND 25 Highlight: A primary residential responsibility determination is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Interest of D.D. (CONFIDENTIAL)(Cons. w/20140457, 20140465, & 20140466)
2015 ND 24 Highlight: A district court judgment terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Huffman Inc. v. WSI
2015 ND 23 Highlight: A district court judgment affirming an administrative law judge's order finding Huffco's drivers are employees is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
|
Rath v. Rath (Cross-ref. w/20130025, 20130184, 20130327 & 20140012)
2015 ND 22 Highlight: A district court order denying Mark Rath's motion to vacate the judgment and orders is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (7). |
|
Winarske v. State (consolidated w/20140113-20140118)
2015 ND 21 Highlight: A district court judgment denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Interest of J.A.H. (Consolidated w/20140146)
2015 ND 20 Highlight: When a juvenile court provides insufficient findings to review, jurisdiction may be retained under N.D.R.App.P. 35(a)(3) and the case remanded with instructions that the juvenile court make expedited findings of fact. |
|
State v. Johnson
2015 ND 19 Highlight: A district court order revoking probation and sentencing a defendant is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Beylund v. Levi
2015 ND 18 Highlight: The implied consent laws do not violate the Fourth Amendment, under the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions. |