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.
1751 - 1800 of 12364 results
|
WSI v. Salat, et al.
2019 ND 294 Highlight: A reasoning mind could reasonably determine the claimant was unable to work and earn as much as he earned at the time of his injury and the claimant suffered low back pain that was attributable to the compensable work injury after November 11, 2016. |
|
Lindstrom v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 293 Highlight: A reasoning mind could have reasonably found a report and notice was forwarded to the Department within five days of the issuance of the temporary operator’s permit as required by law. The hearing officer’s decision to suspend the appellant’s license for 180 days is affirmed. |
|
State v. Walker
2019 ND 292 Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered restitution against a defendant who pled guilty to theft for possession of a stolen motorcycle, and that motorcycle was returned damaged to the victim. |
|
Stein v. State
2019 ND 291 Highlight: A district court was not clearly erroneous in denying the application for post-conviction relief. |
|
State v. Comes
2019 ND 290 Highlight: When both N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-09.1 and N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-01(1) apply to a defendant’s sentence, the defendant is not eligible for parole until eighty-five percent of the sentence has been served or thirty years after admission to the penitentiary, whichever is greater. |
|
State ex rel. City of Marion v. Alber
2019 ND 289
Highlight: Res judicata principles prohibit the review of arguments raised in earlier appeals. |
|
Neutman v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 288 Highlight: A district court judgment is summarily reversed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(b). |
|
Jesser v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2019 ND 287 Highlight: A driver’s limited post-arrest statutory right to counsel does not apply prior to arrest, and the holding in Kuntz v. State Highway Commissioner, 405 N.W.2d 285 (N.D. 1987) is not extended to N.D.C.C. § 39-20-14. |
|
City of Fargo v. Wieland
2019 ND 286
Highlight: Flood control projects are a public use for eminent domain purposes. |
|
Lebeau v. State
2019 ND 285 Highlight: An order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(4). |
|
State v. Dubois
2019 ND 284 Highlight: A district court is authorized to revoke probation for a violation prior to expiration or termination of probation under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6). A court has discretion in sentencing and need not explicitly reference the statutory sentence factors when fixing a sentence. Section 12.1-32-07(6), N.D.C.C., permits a district court to impose any sentence available at the initial time of sentencing upon revocation of probation. Issues not raised in the district court cannot generally be raised for the first time on appeal, absent obvious error. |
|
State v. Pailing
2019 ND 283 Highlight: A district court did not violate the defendant’s due process rights or abuse its discretion in overruling the defendant’s objection and denying the motion for mistrial concerning the State’s anecdote during closing argument. |
|
State Tax Commissioner v. Bosset
2019 ND 282 Highlight: A district court summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (6) and (7). |
|
Wilber v. Scaff
2019 ND 281 Highlight: A district court judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Continental Resources v. N.D. Dep't. of Environmental Quality
2019 ND 280 Highlight: Where the legislature has deferred to an administrative agency’s expertise to develop rules, and has declined to provide clear direction on the substance of the rules to be developed, the “purely legal question” exception to the exhaustion of administrative remedies does not apply. |
|
Saastad v. Saastad
2019 ND 279
Highlight: A district court’s award of primary residential responsibility is a finding of fact, which will not be reversed on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous. |
|
State v. Job
2019 ND 278 Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea. |
|
Matter of O.H.W. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 277 Highlight: A district court’s order denying a petition for discharge from commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Legare
2019 ND 276 Highlight: An Alford plea does not preserve non-jurisdictional claims for appeal. |
|
Krump-Wooton v. Krump
2019 ND 275 Highlight: A district court’s judgment denying a motion to modify parenting time and a motion to modify primary residential responsibility is affirmed. |
|
State v. Maines (consolidated w/20180396)
2019 ND 274 Highlight: A district court may extend an offenders’ sentence if the offender is found to be a habitual offender under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-09. Section 12.1-32-02(9), N.D.C.C., does not apply to an offender’s out of state felony convictions for purposes of determining if the offender is a habitual offender. Section 12.1-32-09, N.D.C.C., specifically refers to convictions in another state and defines a felony in another state as one that is punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of five years or more, regardless of the actual punishment imposed. |
|
Hughes v. Olheiser Masonry, et al.
2019 ND 273 Highlight: Delivery is not accomplished at the time of mailing the summons and complaint to the sheriff’s department under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-38. An attempt to commence an action is not the equivalent to commencement when the summons is not delivered to the sheriff within the statute of limitations. |
|
Interest of J.T.L.D. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 272 Highlight: Order terminating father’s parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Dubois
2019 ND 271 Highlight: A district court’s order revoking probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Wolf v. Wolf, et al.
2019 ND 270 Highlight: The district court’s judgment modifying parenting time is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Watkins v. State
2019 ND 269 Highlight: The order denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Broten v. Carter, et al.
2019 ND 268
Highlight: The two year statute of limitations for malpractice claims begins to run when the client discovers his attorney’s negligence and suffers some damage. |
|
Kemmet v. Steiner, et al.
2019 ND 267 Highlight: A district court judgment is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
|
State v. Buchanan
2019 ND 266 Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
State v. Wallace
2019 ND 265 Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3),(4). |
|
Matter of Emelia Hirsch Trust
2019 ND 264 Highlight: An order denying a motion to vacate and terminate a trust is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Matter of Didier
2019 ND 263 Highlight: A district court must find a sexually dangerous individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Past conduct is relevant and may be taken into account with present conduct to determine if an individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Inappropriate behavior not deemed actual misconduct requiring a formal sanction may be considered in determining an inability to control behavior. Conduct showing more than just a lack of progress, but a lack of participation, is sufficient to show an individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. |
|
State v. Vetter
2019 ND 262
Highlight: Under N.D.R.Ev. 201(b)(2), a court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. |
|
Fettig v. Fettig, et al. (consolidated w/ 20190103)
2019 ND 261
Highlight: Real property can be gifted to a minor if there is an intention by the donor to then and there give the property to the donee, coupled with an actual or constructive delivery of the property to the donee, and acceptance of the property by the donee. |
|
State v. Pittenger
2019 ND 260 Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). |
|
State v. Baltrusch
2019 ND 259
Highlight: To support a claim of insufficient evidence to support a conviction, the defendant bears the burden of showing the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, reveals no reasonable inference of guilt. |
|
Interest of J.B. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 258
Highlight: When a committed individual petitions for discharge from commitment as a sexually dangerous individual, the State must prove the individual remains a sexually dangerous individual by clear and convincing evidence. |
|
Estate of Blikre
2019 ND 257
Highlight: A holographic will is valid if the signature and material portions of the document are in the testator’s handwriting. |
|
State v. G.C.H.
2019 ND 256 Highlight: The question of law certified by a North Dakota district court is not answered because it is not dispositive of the case. The North Dakota Supreme Court exercises supervisory jurisdiction to reverse the district court’s order finding a 16 and 17 year old married person was not a “child” under N.D.C.C. § 27-20-02(4)(b) when the offenses allegedly were committed. Reversed and remanded with directions to vacate the judgment and dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. |
|
Interest of K.V. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2019 ND 255 Highlight: Juvenile court findings of delinquency for fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer and reckless driving are not clearly erroneous and are affirmed. A juvenile court finding of delinquency for criminal trespass is reversed due to insufficient evidence. |
|
State v. Grzadzieleski
2019 ND 254
Highlight: The State may not appeal from an in limine order excluding evidence based on the physician-patient privilege under N.D.R.Ev. 503. |
|
Interest of D.V.A. (Confidential)
2019 ND 253 Highlight: A district court order denying discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Rocky Mountain Steel Foundations. v. Brockett Company, et al.
2019 ND 252 Highlight: A lienholder who recovers in a suit upon a bond is entitled to recover a reasonable attorney’s fee for the proceedings before the district court and for a successful appeal. |
|
Clarke v. Taylor
2019 ND 251 Highlight: A district court’s domestic violence protection order is affirmed. |
|
State v. Ruddell
2019 ND 250 Highlight: District court criminal judgment summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Huerd v. General Motors, LLC
2019 ND 249 Highlight: An action brought in small claims court is subject to the doctrine of res judicata. A small claims court’s judgment cannot be appealed in district court. Unless requested by a party, oral argument on a motion under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2 is not required. |
|
Herman v. Herman, et al.
2019 ND 248
Highlight: N.D.C.C. § 59-10.1-03(1) requires receipt of the notice, proven through the presumption or otherwise, to begin the 120 day limitation period. The presumption under N.D.C.C. § 59-10.1-03(1) is rebuttable. |
|
Interest of G.T. (CONFIDENTIAL)(consol. w/20190258-20190260 & 20190265-20190268)
2019 ND 247 Highlight: Orders terminating mother, father, and John Doe’s parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(4), and (7). |
|
State v. Tyler
2019 ND 246 Highlight: When a party moves for a mistrial because of an unavailable witness who already testified and neither party is at fault, the movant must make an offer of proof to provide a record of what additional testimony the witness would provide and why the additional testimony is material. |
|
Ramirez v. Houge, et al.
2019 ND 245 Highlight: District court judgment affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (2), and (4). |