Opinions

Sagebrush Resources, LLC v. Peterson, et al. 2014 ND 3
Docket No.: 20130080
Filing Date: 1/14/2014
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A district court may award attorney fees for allegations and denials in any pleadings in court that are made without reasonable cause and not in good faith and are found to be untrue.

Lucas v. Lucas (cross-reference w/20110365) 2014 ND 2
Docket No.: 20130070
Filing Date: 1/14/2014
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A district court has broad discretion in making a primary residential responsibility decision, but the court must consider all of the relevant statutory best-interest factors in reaching its decision.
Although a separate finding is not required for each statutory best-interest factor, the district court's findings must contain sufficient specificity to show the factual basis for the primary residential responsibility decision.

Disciplinary Board v. Tollefson (Consolidated w/ 20130344 & 20130345) 2014 ND 1
Docket No.: 20130343
Filing Date: 1/9/2014
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Original Proceeding
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Lawyer disbarred.

Reep, et al. v. State, et al. (consolidated w/20130111) 2013 ND 253
Docket No.: 20130110
Filing Date: 12/26/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: The State of North Dakota owned mineral interests under the shore zone of navigable waters upon admission to the Union, and the anti-gift clause of the state constitution precludes construing a statute as a gift of the State's mineral interests to upland owners.
Ownership of mineral interests under the shore zone of navigable waters may differ for individual upland owners.
If the chain of title reflects the State granted its equal footing interests to upland owners, those upland owners take to the low watermark, subject to the public trust doctrine and except where the deed provides otherwise.

State v. Nguyen 2013 ND 252
Docket No.: 20130159
Filing Date: 12/26/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: The use of a drug-sniffing dog in a common hallway of a secured apartment building does not constitute an unreasonable search.

Tollefson v. Bjornstad, et al. (cross-reference w/20120347) 2013 ND 251
Docket No.: 20130229
Filing Date: 12/24/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying a motion under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) to vacate prior orders entered in a civil RICO action is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Disciplinary Board v. Hardwick (Consolidated w/ 20130289) 2013 ND 250
Docket No.: 20130288
Filing Date: 12/23/2013
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Original Proceeding
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Lawyer discipline imposed.

Dominguez v. State 2013 ND 249
Docket No.: 20130098
Filing Date: 12/19/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: To commit an attempt offense, the accused must have an intent to commit the underlying crime.
Attempted murder committed under circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to the value of human life is not a cognizable offense, because the accused must have an intent to kill for attempted murder and murder under circumstance manifesting an extreme indifference to the value of human life results in an unintentional death.

Guthmiller Farms v. Guthmiller, et al. 2013 ND 248
Docket No.: 20130156
Filing Date: 12/19/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A limited liability partnership that loses its registration is still a partnership for the purposes of conducting business. A successor partnership has the ability to sue and be sued in the name of the partnership under N.D.C.C. 45-15-07.
A consideration clause in an agreement is presumptive evidence that consideration exists for the agreement.
Consideration may be executed or executory in whole or in part, so long as it was given in consideration of the agreement at issue.

Interest of D.O. (Confidential) 2013 ND 247
Docket No.: 20130174
Filing Date: 12/19/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Juvenile Law
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: When a defendant argues false or misleading testimony was presented in support of a search warrant, a Franks hearing must be held to determine whether law enforcement omitted facts with the intent or in reckless disregard of whether they were misleading. The affidavit also must not have been sufficient to support probable cause for the search warrant if omitted information had been included.
All information providing probable cause must be considered together, and in a commonsense and realistic fashion.
The right to confrontation is a trial right and does not apply to the same extent in pretrial hearings.
The State must show reasonable grounds exist to transfer a juvenile's case to the district court.