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.
1851 - 1900 of 12446 results
|
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). |
|
First National Bank of Omaha v. Young
2019 ND 244 Highlight: A district court summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
|
Trulson, et al. v. Meiers, et al.
2019 ND 243
Highlight: Whether there was delivery of a deed is a question of fact. |
|
Carlson v. State
2019 ND 242 Highlight: The order denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Gregory
2019 ND 241
Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). Sufficient evidence exists that could allow a jury to draw a reasonable inference in favor of conviction of manslaughter. |
|
Brock v. Price, et al.
2019 ND 240
Highlight: A district court may revise any non-final order before entry of a final judgment and has discretion to extend deadlines in its scheduling order before trial. |
|
State v. Smith
2019 ND 239
Highlight: A defendant’s failure to object at trial to character evidence or evidence of alleged prior bad acts under N.D.R.Ev. 404 forfeits the claim of error. |
|
State v. Gray
2019 ND 238 Highlight: District court judgment summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Whetsel v. State
2019 ND 237 Highlight: A district court order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Vogt
2019 ND 236
Highlight: A defendant seeking post-conviction relief cannot circumvent the Uniform Postconviction Procedure Act by designating his application for post-conviction relief as a motion under a rule of criminal procedure or by filing his motion in his criminal file, rather than filing an application for post-conviction relief. |
|
Interest of G.D-M. (CONFIDENTIAL) (consol. w/ 20190233)
2019 ND 235 Highlight: Orders terminating father’s parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Cichos, et al. v. Dakota Eye Institute, P.C., et al.
2019 ND 234 Highlight: For public policy reasons, there is no third-party duty owed by a physician to warn a patient of the danger of driving with a latent condition. A purely economic claim against a physician based on indemnity for medical malpractice is assignable from a patient to a third party who was injured as a result of the malpractice. Under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46, an affidavit has a low threshold to meet the requirements. |
|
Franciere v. City of Mandan (Cross-referenced)
2019 ND 233 Highlight: A district court must rule on a motion to dismiss for insufficiency of service and lack of personal jurisdiction before adjudicating the merits of a claim. |
|
Interest of Hoff
2019 ND 232 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) and (4). |
|
Alvarado v. N.D. Dept. of Transportation
2019 ND 231 Highlight: Without a valid request for testing, including a valid advisory, there can be no refusal to submit to testing under N.D.C.C. §§ 39-20-01(3)(a) or 39-08-01(2). |
|
Larson, et al. v. Tonneson, et al.
2019 ND 230
Highlight: In an appeal from a bench trial, the district court’s findings of fact are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review, and its conclusions of law are fully reviewable. |
|
State v. Greenshields
2019 ND 229 Highlight: When the dismissal of a criminal count or entire complaint is silent whether it is with or without prejudice, it is ambiguous and examination of the parties and the district court’s intent is required. |
|
Pennington, et al. v. Continental Resources, Inc.
2019 ND 228
Highlight: Oil and gas leases are interpreted as a whole to give effect to every part if reasonably practicable. |
|
State v. Johns
2019 ND 227 Highlight: A completed deferred imposition of sentence that has resulted in dismissal of the charge involving a prior conviction under N.D.C.C. title 19-03.4 can not be used to enhance a subsequent charge of unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia. |
|
Plains Trucking, LLC v. Cresap, et al.
2019 ND 226
Highlight: The supreme court exercises its authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously, and only to rectify errors and prevent injustice in extraordinary cases in which there is no adequate alternative remedy. |
|
Plains Trucking, LLC v. Hagar, et al.
2019 ND 226
Highlight: The supreme court exercises its authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously, and only to rectify errors and prevent injustice in extraordinary cases in which there is no adequate alternative remedy. |
|
Baker v. Baker
2019 ND 225
Highlight: On a motion to modify primary residential responsibility, a district court must accept the truth of the moving party’s allegations unless an opposing affidavit conclusively establishes the movant’s allegations have no credibility. |