Opinions

Danuser v. IDA Marketing Corp., et al. 2013 ND 196
Docket No.: 20120443
Filing Date: 10/30/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A director in a closely-held corporation may be liable to a single shareholder for actions that unfairly prejudice the shareholder.
A district court has broad equitable powers to remedy violations of duties by directors, and the court's determination of remedies is reviewed under the abuse-of-discretion standard.

State v. Evans 2013 ND 195
Docket No.: 20130121
Filing Date: 10/30/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

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.
When a police officer simply relies on information gathered by other officers on which to base his opinion, he is not offering lay opinion testimony as N.D.R.Ev. 701 intends.
The harmless error standard is applied to a lay witness testifying as an expert.

State v. Mossey 2013 ND 194
Docket No.: 20130138
Filing Date: 10/23/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Per Curiam

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
Docket No.: 20130101
Filing Date: 10/22/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

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.
When a release of liability provision is ambiguous, a question of fact exists as to the parties' intent, and extrinsic evidence may be offered to help determine the parties' intent.

Kukla v. Kukla 2013 ND 192
Docket No.: 20120451
Filing Date: 10/22/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

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.
Whether a motion for relief from judgment has been timely made is within the district court's discretion and will not be overturned on appeal unless the court abuses its discretion.

Matter of Hehn (consolidated w/ 20130143) 2013 ND 191
Docket No.: 20130055
Filing Date: 10/22/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Maring, Mary

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
Docket No.: 20130093
Filing Date: 10/22/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

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.
In reviewing a district court's order denying a petition for discharge from treatment as a sexually dangerous individual, an appellate court gives great deference to the district court's credibility determinations of expert witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony.

State ex rel. City of Marion v. Alber 2013 ND 189
Docket No.: 20130094
Filing Date: 10/22/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

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.
Findings of fact and conclusions of law are sufficient for a finding of contempt when the district court's statements clearly demonstrate the basis for its decision.
Methods of objection, such as motions to strike, are available post-hearing and must be made to preserve argument on appeal contesting the submission of post-hearing evidence.

State v. Samshal 2013 ND 188
Docket No.: 20120436
Filing Date: 10/22/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: In criminal cases, a defendant's testimony about statements made by the victim of the alleged offense, offered to establish the defendant's state of mind, are not hearsay because they are not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
A defendant is not entitled to assert a defense of premises claim when the victim and defendant reside in the same premises and the victim was not unlawfully within the premises.

Empower the Taxpayer, et al. v. Fong, et al.(cross-ref w/20120191, 197, 444 2013 ND 187
Docket No.: 20130011
Filing Date: 10/22/2013
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A reviewing court cannot perform its appellate function unless it is able to understand the basis for the trial court's decision, and therefore the trial court must provide an adequate explanation of the evidentiary and legal basis for its decision.
A court may not impose monetary sanctions against a represented party for bringing a frivolous action in violation of N.D.R.Civ.P. 11(b)(2).