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.
381 - 390 of 12235 results
|
Burleigh Cty. Social Service Bd. v. Rath
2024 ND 161
Highlight: The doctrine of latches does not apply to child support arrearages. |
|
Heiser, et al. v. Dahl, et al.
2024 ND 160
Highlight: To satisfy the elements for adverse possession, the acts on which the claimant relies must be actual, visible, continuous, notorious, distinct, and hostile, and of such character to unmistakably indicate an assertion of claim of exclusive ownership by the occupant. |
|
N.D. Energy Services v. Lime Rock Resources III-A, et al.
2024 ND 159
Highlight: A lease must be read and considered in its entirety so that all of its provisions are taken into consideration to determine the parties' true intent. |
|
State v. Watts
2024 ND 158
Highlight: When a defendant fails to object to a proposed instruction properly or fails to specifically request an instruction or object to the omission of an instruction, the issue is not adequately preserved for appellate review and the inquiry is limited to whether the jury instructions constitute obvious error affecting substantial rights. |
|
Nordquist v. Alonge, et al.
2024 ND 157
Highlight: A petitioner for a writ of mandamus must show a clear legal right to performance of the act sought to be compelled and must establish no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy exists in the ordinary course of law. |
|
Fiebiger v. Anderson
2024 ND 156 Highlight: In summary judgment proceedings, the non-moving party cannot rely on pleadings or unsupported conclusionary allegations. The non-moving party must present admissible evidence that raises an issue of material fact. If the non-moving party does not meet their burden, the district court may grant summary judgment |
|
Morales v. Weatherford U.S., et al.
2024 ND 155 Highlight: Recovery under a theory of negligence requires a plaintiff to show the defendant owed a duty of care. Whether a duty exists is a legal question to be decided on the facts. Under premises liability law, landowners owe a general duty to lawful entrants to maintain their property in a reasonably safe condition in view of all the circumstances. A landowner's duty to protect entrants upon the land or warn of dangerous conditions is limited when the dangerous condition is known or obvious to the entrant. Roadways present an open and obvious danger to pedestrians of being struck by vehicular traffic. A landowner may have a duty to protect against open and obvious dangers when there is reason to expect that an entrant's attention may be distracted. The distraction exception is not available when the plaintiff is the source of inattention. |
|
Anderson v. Foss, et al.
2024 ND 154 Highlight: A district court's order is affirmed in part and remanded for 30 days while retaining jurisdiction under N.D.R.App.P. 35(a)(3) for no further proceedings other than to provide the additional findings requested by the Court. |
|
State v. Reiswig
2024 ND 153
Highlight: This Court employs a trustworthiness approach when analyzing whether a confession is sufficiently corroborated. Under this approach, not every statement made in a confession must be independently verified; instead, we look to a statement made in its entirety and the facts and circumstances in which it was made to determine if it is reliable and trustworthy. |
|
State v. Prescott
2024 ND 152 Highlight: A criminal judgment for gross sexual imposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |