Opinions

State v. Nelson 2024 ND 55
Docket No.: 20230346
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: If a defendant’s crime and revocation of probation occurred after the 2021 amendment to N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6), a district court may resentence the defendant up to the maximum allowed at the time of his original sentence.

State v. Thornton, et al. 2024 ND 54
Docket No.: 20240017
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Original Proceeding - Criminal - Writ of Supervision
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: We exercise our authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously on a case-by-case basis and only to rectify errors and prevent injustice in extraordinary cases when no adequate alternative remedy exists. Our authority to issue a supervisory writ is discretionary. We generally will not exercise our supervisory jurisdiction where the proper remedy is an appeal.

The plain language of the statute gives the Department the authority to approve the secondary process of the risk assessment and the responsibility to perform that secondary process, and the statutory definition of “risk assessment” is not a rule of procedure subject to being superseded by court rule.

Dahms v. Legacy Plumbing 2024 ND 53
Docket No.: 20230349
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Conduct constituting a breach of contract does not create a tort for negligence, unless the defendant’s conduct also establishes a breach of an independent duty that does not arise from the contract.

Speculation is not enough to defeat a motion for summary judgment, and when reasonable persons can reach only one conclusion from the evidence a court may grant summary judgment.

This Court does not review issues which are raised for the first time on appeal.

Whitetail Wave v. XTO Energy, et al. 2024 ND 52
Docket No.: 20230283
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A title dispute does not establish a taking. The State may protect its interests in a title dispute and must do “something more” than assert title to complete a taking.

Suspension of royalty payments was lawful under N.D.C.C. § 47-16-39.1 when there is a dispute of title that would affect distribution of royalty payments.

Whitetail Wave v. XTO Energy, et al. 2024 ND 52
Docket No.: 20230283
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Interest of Y.R. 2024 ND 51
Docket No.: 20240063
Filing Date: 4/4/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Happel v. State 2024 ND 50
Docket No.: 20230338
Filing Date: 3/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

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

Happel v. State 2024 ND 50
Docket No.: 20230338
Filing Date: 3/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Adoption of R.E.M. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2024 ND 49
Docket No.: 20230321
Filing Date: 3/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying a petition for adoption is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

State v. Driver 2024 ND 48
Docket No.: 20230259
Filing Date: 3/18/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The scope of an opening statement rests largely in the discretion of the trial court, and this Court will not reverse a conviction on the ground that the opening statement was prejudicial unless there is a clear abuse of that discretion.

Forfeiture is the failure to timely assert a right, which is reviewed for obvious error. The burden to show an obvious error is on the appellant.

A denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).