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.
3251 - 3260 of 12137 results
|
Peterson v. Pierce, et al.
2013 ND 198 Highlight: In a dispute over a lost rental payment, the judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Lang
2013 ND 197 Highlight: Conviction for theft of property is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Danuser v. IDA Marketing Corp., et al.
2013 ND 196
Highlight: A director in a closely-held corporation may be liable to a single shareholder for actions that unfairly prejudice the shareholder. |
|
State v. Evans
2013 ND 195
Highlight: Lay witness testimony, in the form of an opinion, must be rationally based on the perception of the witness and also helpful to the jury's determination of a fact in question. |
|
State v. Mossey
2013 ND 194 Highlight: Conviction for class B felony luring a minor by computer is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7). |
|
Hillerson, et al. v. Bismarck Public Schools, et al.
2013 ND 193
Highlight: When reasonable differences of opinion exist as to the terms of a release of liability provision in a contract, the release of liability provision is ambiguous, and summary judgment is not appropriate. |
|
Kukla v. Kukla
2013 ND 192
Highlight: A party moving for relief from a judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) has the burden to establish sufficient grounds for disturbing the finality of the decree, and relief should be granted only in exceptional circumstances. |
|
Matter of Hehn (consolidated w/ 20130143)
2013 ND 191 Highlight: A person civilly committed as a sexually dangerous individual is entitled as a matter of right to only one discharge hearing within a twelve-month period. |
|
Matter of Rubey (cross-reference 20100292 & 20110322)
2013 ND 190
Highlight: A proponent of excluded evidence must make an offer of proof to the trial court and show prejudice from the restriction to show an abuse of discretion. |
|
State ex rel. City of Marion v. Alber
2013 ND 189
Highlight: A district court does not abuse its discretion when a finding of willful contempt is supported by the evidence and inferences from the evidence. |