Opinions

Estate of Kish 2024 ND 76
Docket No.: 20230275
Filing Date: 4/26/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A two-step analysis is required to determine whether an order is appealable. First, for this Court to have appellate jurisdiction, the order being appealed must meet statutory criteria for appealability. Second, for this Court to consider the appeal at this time, the requirements of N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) must have been satisfied.
Decisions have stated that this Court lacks appellate jurisdiction when an appellant fails to obtain N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) certification when required, but dismissal under Rule 54(b) is not for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
The parties did not request Rule 54(b) certification. The case is remanded under N.D.R.App.P. 35(a)(3)(B) so that the district court may determine in the first instance whether a Rule 54(b) certification is appropriate.

State v. Fuglesten 2024 ND 74
Docket No.: 20230299
Filing Date: 4/19/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a conditional plea is reversed and remanded to allow for withdrawal of the guilty plea because law enforcement illegally entered the home without exigent circumstances. If a misdemeanant is fleeing law enforcement, then exigent circumstances are required to permit law enforcement to enter the misdemeanant's home.

Berdahl v. Berdahl 2024 ND 73
Docket No.: 20230278
Filing Date: 4/19/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: When this Court has made a legal pronouncement and remanded a case for further proceedings, the parties may not relitigate the issue and the district court is required to follow the terms of our decision. The district court has some discretion on the procedures used on remand. However, that discretion is not without bounds and must be exercised within the scope of our decision. Adverse or erroneous rulings do not, by themselves, demonstrate bias of a district court judge.

Schmidt v. Hess Corp., et al. 2024 ND 72
Docket No.: 20230272
Filing Date: 4/19/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: To prove negligence, a plaintiff must establish the existence of a duty, breach of that duty, and an injury proximately caused by the breach of duty.
The employer of an independent contractor who retains control of part of the work owes a duty of care to the independent contractor' s employees to exercise the retained control with reasonable
care.
A property owner who hires an independent contractor may be held liable to the independent contractor and its employees for injuries resulting from hazards at the workplace when the property
owner retains control over the work.

Cichos, et al. v. Dakota Eye Institute, P.C., et al. 2024 ND 71
Docket No.: 20230212
Filing Date: 4/19/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Rule 54(b), N.D.R.Civ.P., preserves our long-standing policy against piecemeal appeals. When this Court considers the merits in a case involving a N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) certification, it does so because the resolution of the issue on appeal will always need to be resolved and is separate from the issue left to be adjudicated.
To establish a prima facie case of professional negligence, a plaintiff must produce expert evidence establishing the applicable standard of care, violation of that standard, and a causal relationship between the violation and the harm complained of. To warrant a finding that a person's conduct is the proximate cause of an injury, the injury must be the natural and probable result of the conduct and must have been foreseen or reasonably anticipated by that person as a probable result of the conduct. Mere speculation is not enough.

Rennie v. State 2024 ND 69
Docket No.: 20230303
Filing Date: 4/19/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying a petition for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Garaas, et al. v. Continental Resources, et al. 2024 ND 68
Docket No.: 20230306
Filing Date: 4/19/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: We will not consider an appeal in a multi-claim lawsuit where the district court order disposes of fewer than all the claims against all the parties unless the court has determined that a certification under N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) is appropriate.

Urrabazo v. State 2024 ND 67
Docket No.: 20230316
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A district court judgment denying an application for postconviction relief is affirmed.

This Court does not reweigh credibility or resolve conflicts in the evidence.

State v. Freeman 2024 ND 66
Docket No.: 20230207
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A motion for mistrial is reviewed for an abuse of discretion or a manifest injustice would result. Granting a mistrial is an extreme remedy and should only be resorted to when a fundamental defect or occurrence in the trial proceedings exists that makes it evident that further proceedings would be productive of manifest injustice.

Trial courts have wide discretion over the conduct of trial and the courtroom.

A trial court does not abuse its discretion by granting a recess when jurors are ill or have other such emergencies.

A criminal judgment entered after a jury found the defendant guilty of murder is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Kemmet v. Kemmet 2024 ND 65
Docket No.: 20230194
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A divorce judgment is reversed in part and remanded for clarification of the district court’s findings regarding equitable distribution of the marital estate and a correct accounting of the distribution.

All property held by either party, whether held jointly or individually, is considered marital property, and the district court must determine the total value of the marital property before making an equitable distribution.

Separate property, even if it is inherited, must initially be included in the marital estate, but the property’s origin may be considered when equitably dividing the estate.