Opinions

State v. Landrus 2019 ND 162
Docket No.: 20180343
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court’s use of a defense of property jury instruction did not improperly shift the burden of the State to disprove the absence of self-defense.
A lesser included offense instruction may be requested by the prosecution or defense, or the court may give such an instruction.
Evidence is sufficient if it allows the jury to draw an inference reasonably tending to prove guilt and fairly warranting a conviction when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict.

City of West Fargo v. Williams 2019 ND 161
Docket No.: 20180447
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The right to an additional independent test under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-02 only arises when the driver submits to the chemical test requested by law enforcement.

An on-site screening test under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-14(3) is not the same as a chemical test under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-01(1) and therefore a person is not an “individual tested” under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-02 by virtue of his submission to on-site screening tests. Likewise, a person is not statutorily entitled to an independent test of his choosing because he submitted to on-site screening tests since a test in addition to “any administered” under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-02 refers to any administered chemical tests.

Klundt v. Benjamin 2019 ND 160
Docket No.: 20180419
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The district court’s findings on the best interest factors, as well as its decision regarding primary residential responsibility, were not clearly erroneous.

The district court may discuss separation of siblings as part of, or separate from, the best interest factors, as long as the court adequately explains its decision.

The district court’s sua sponte decision to change the minor child’s last name was an abuse of discretion.

State v. Muhammad 2019 ND 159
Docket No.: 20180357
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the recordings of an interrogation without playing the recordings in their entirety.

The admission of recordings without playing them in open court does not violate a defendant’s right to a public trial.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to admit evidence of prior sexual encounters between the defendant and the alleged victim.

Interiors by France v. Mitzel Contractors, Inc., et al. 2019 ND 158
Docket No.: 20180399
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An award of attorney fees to a prevailing plaintiff under N.D.C.C. § 27-08.1-04 does not extend to parties who were not part of the original small claims court proceedings.

State v. Pemberton (consolidated w/ 20180415) 2019 ND 157
Docket No.: 20180414
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Defendant failed to support his claim that a probable cause finding for a non-cognizable offense was obvious error.

The amendment of an attempted murder charge, while an abuse of discretion, did not rise to the level of obvious error.

Defendant failed to support his claim an error in the jury instructions was obvious error.

Defendant failed to support his claim an error in the verdict form was obvious error.

Defendant failed to support his claim that irregularities in the admonishments given to the jury during trial were obvious errors.

Hoffman v. Jevne 2019 ND 156
Docket No.: 20180367
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: If a party bringing a motion under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2 timely requests oral argument, the request must be granted.
If a party fails to request oral argument on a motion under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2, a district court has broad discretion to either require an evidentiary hearing or decide the motion on the basis of the parties’ submissions.

Wolt v. Wolt, et al. 2019 ND 155
Docket No.: 20180304
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Although N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-01(10) describes activities that are considered self-employment, the determination of a self-employed individual’s income is governed by N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-05.

An obligor’s W-2 wages received from his Subchapter S corporation are not self-employment income.

Puklich v. Puklich, et al. 2019 ND 154
Docket No.: 20180301
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court’s findings on valuation of property will not be reversed unless they are clearly erroneous.

The application and appropriate amount of a minority discount and a lack-of-marketability discount are questions of fact.

If those in control of a closely-held corporation have acted fraudulently, illegally, or in a manner prejudicial to the shareholders, a court may dissolve the corporation or grant any equitable relief it deems just and reasonable.

Valuation of a partnership ownership interest should be determined as of the date of dissolution.

A court has discretion under partnership and corporation laws to fashion equitable remedies for a breach of fiduciary duties.

Appellate courts review the record and findings as a whole and if the controlling findings are supported by the evidence, they will be upheld on appeal notwithstanding immaterial misstatements in the lower court’s decision.

Unpled claims are not tried by the express or implied consent of the parties when the opposing party objects to the introduction of evidence relating to the unpled claim.

Bridgeford v. Sorel 2019 ND 153
Docket No.: 20180390
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An officer’s actions remained within the community caretaker exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment when he knocked on the car window of an individual who appeared to be sleeping with the car running in a gas station parking lot.

An officer’s actions remained within the community caretaker exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment when entering an individual’s vehicle subsequent to the individual’s failure to respond to the officer’s attempts to gain his attention outside the vehicle.

State v. Taylor 2019 ND 152
Docket No.: 20190005
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Appeal from an order denying a motion for new trial is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

City of Dickinson v. Vaagen 2019 ND 151
Docket No.: 20190053
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment finding defendant guilty of driving under the influence is summarily reversed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(b).

Schatz v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation 2019 ND 150
Docket No.: 20190068
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: District court’s judgment affirming a North Dakota Department of Transportation decision suspending driving privileges is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Everett v. State 2019 ND 149
Docket No.: 20180436
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: In post-conviction relief proceedings, it is not an abuse of discretion to deny default judgment when a petitioner cannot show he suffered any prejudice from the State's untimely response.
A district court order summarily dismissing a post-conviction relief application is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), (6), and (7).

Blackcloud v. State 2019 ND 148
Docket No.: 20190029
Filing Date: 6/27/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

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

Frontier Fiscal Services LLC v. Pinky's Aggregates, Inc., et al. 2019 ND 147
Docket No.: 20180329
Filing Date: 5/28/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The burden of proof ordinarily rests with the party who possesses the facts on the issue in dispute.

Since entities and persons are unable to guaranty their own debts, courts will not construe guaranties signed in both a representative and individual capacity as constituting a guaranty by the entity involved because to do so would render the guaranty a nullity.

Parol evidence is not admissible to contradict unambiguous terms of a written agreement.

Good consideration for a contract is any benefit conferred or detriment suffered.

Atkins v. State 2019 ND 146
Docket No.: 20180437
Filing Date: 5/24/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An applicant for post-conviction relief should have 14 days to respond to a motion to dismiss under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a)(2).

State v. Atkins 2019 ND 145
Docket No.: 20180411
Filing Date: 5/24/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A defendant may not avoid the procedures of the Uniform Postconviction Procedure Act by designating his motion under a rule of criminal procedure or by filing his motion in his criminal file, rather than filing as a new action for post-conviction relief.

Swenson, et al. v. Mahlum, et al. 2019 ND 144
Docket No.: 20180345
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Order and judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claims with prejudice and defendant’s third-party claims without prejudice was appealable because plaintiff’s claims were adjudicated and third-party claims were dependent on plaintiff’s claims.
The elements for a prima facie case for breach of contract are: (1) the existence of a contract; (2) breach of the contract; and (3) damages which flow from the breach.
Statutory protections for people assisting or dealing with a conservator for value in a transaction do not apply to transactions between two third-parties.
The general rule in the case of a breach of contract is that the measure of damages is the amount which will compensate the injured person for the loss which a fulfillment of the contract would have prevented or the breach of the contract now requires.

James Vault & Precast Co., et al. v. B&B Hot Oil Service, Inc., et al. 2019 ND 143
Docket No.: 20180317
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A contractual provision purporting to exempt anyone from responsibility for a willful or negligent violation of the law is against the policy of law and not enforceable.

Lee v. Lee 2019 ND 142
Docket No.: 20180382
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The district court’s property valuations were not clearly erroneous.

The district court’s valuation of a life estate using N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-02.1-32 was not clearly erroneous.

The district court considered the source of the property, and its ultimate distribution was not clearly erroneous.

The district court’s six-month delay in issuing a final judgment did not compel reconsideration of the property division.

Estate of Hogen 2019 ND 141
Docket No.: 20180325
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A probate court has inherent authority to control its docket and to protect its jurisdiction and judgments, the integrity of the court, and the orderly and expeditious administration of justice, and may award attorney fees to further that end.

State v. Peterson 2019 ND 140
Docket No.: 20180422
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A district court found a sufficient factual basis to support the defendant’s guilty plea based on the record and the State’s offer of proof.

An attorney does not actively misinform a defendant by failing to inform the defendant of the application of the eighty-five percent rule under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-09.1.

Manifest injustice requiring withdrawal of a guilty plea does not exist where a defendant does not provide evidence that he did not understand the nature of his plea agreement.

Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. v. Behm 2019 ND 139
Docket No.: 20180321
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Where eminent domain is exercised by a utility business, condemnation for service to a single industrial customer does not forestall a finding that the taking is for a public use.

In the absence of bad faith, gross abuse of discretion, or fraud by the condemning authority in its determination that the property sought is necessary for the authorized use and is pursuant to specific statutory authority, such determination should not be disturbed by the courts.

The Supreme Court does not address inadequately briefed issues.

State v. Vetter 2019 ND 138
Docket No.: 20180356
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A traffic stop is not expanded by incidental questions the officer asks without reasonable suspicion so long as they occur prior to the completion of the stop and the officer does not deliberately delay completion of the stop.

Morales v. State 2019 ND 137
Docket No.: 20180408
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Summary dismissal of a post-conviction application for ineffective assistance of counsel is appropriate if the applicant does not claim that, but for his attorney’s errors, he would have insisted on going to trial.

Watford City Lodging LLC v. Miskin 2019 ND 136
Docket No.: 20180339
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Landlord/Tenant
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: In summary eviction proceedings, the right to possession of the property is the only fact that can be litigated unless damages or rent is claimed.

Olson v. State 2019 ND 135
Docket No.: 20180268
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Accomplice to murder under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life is a cognizable offense under North Dakota law.

A person may be convicted as an accomplice if the person intends that an offense be committed and aids another in committing the offense.

A defendant may not withdraw a guilty plea after the district court has imposed sentence unless the defendant shows withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice.

State v. Vigen 2019 ND 134
Docket No.: 20180394
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An informed consent advisory omitting statutory language regarding refusal to submit to a urine test does not comply with N.D.C.C. § 39-20-01(3)(a).

Ortega v. Sanford Bismarck, et al. 2019 ND 133
Docket No.: 20180331
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The purpose of the expert opinion affidavit requirement under N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46 is to screen totally unsupported claims and to prevent protracted litigation when a medical malpractice plaintiff cannot substantiate a basis for the claim.
District courts should be cautious when granting summary judgment on propositions of law that were not advanced by the parties.
This Court on appeal does not provide advisory opinions.

Sutton v. N.D. Dept. of Transportation 2019 ND 132
Docket No.: 20180427
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Checking the boxes denoting an odor of alcohol and refusal of chemical testing, in combination with a note in the explanation box stating the driver declined field sobriety tests, is sufficient to render the Report and Notice Form adequate under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-04.

Bride v. Trinity Hospital, et al. 2019 ND 131
Docket No.: 20180335
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A dismissal without prejudice is appealable if the statute of limitations has expired on the plaintiff’s claim, foreclosing further litigation in this state.
A plaintiff in a medical malpractice action must serve an affidavit containing an admissible expert opinion supporting a prima facie case of professional negligence within three months of the commencement of the action or request an extension of the time to serve the affidavit within the three-month period.
Claims of inadequate follow-up or post-operative care ordinarily require expert testimony regarding the appropriate standard of care.

Nodak Mutual Insurance Company v. Steffes, et al. 2019 ND 130
Docket No.: 20180359
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Insurance
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An order granting a new trial is not reviewable without N.D.Civ.P. 54(b) certification.

A two prong inquiry is used to determine whether an order is appealable if unadjudicated claims remain to be resolved by the trial court. First, the order must satisfy one of the statutorily enumerated bases for appeal. Second, the order must be certified under N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b).

Heartland State Bank v. Larson, et al. 2019 ND 129
Docket No.: 20180241
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Foreclosure
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A creditor must strictly comply with the statutory provisions relating to the foreclosure of a mortgage, including the provisions for notice before foreclosure.
A defective notice before foreclosure is fatal to a creditor’s foreclosure action if the issue is raised during the pendency of the action and impairs a right of the debtor.

Twin City Technical LLC, et al. v. Williams County, et al. 2019 ND 128
Docket No.: 20180264
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A county’s lease of minerals executed in violation of mandatory competitive bidding statutes renders the lease invalid.
Laches is a delay or lapse of time in commencing an action that works a disadvantage or prejudice to the adverse party because of a change in conditions during the delay.

Jensen v. State 2019 ND 126
Docket No.: 20180280
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A Rule 11(d) motion to withdraw a guilty plea, filed after entry of the criminal judgment and a stipulated dismissal of the direct appeal, is not a critical stage of the proceeding affording the movant the constitutional guarantee to counsel nor a stage of the proceeding requiring counsel under N.D.R.Crim.P. 44(a).

A Rule 35(b) motion for reduction of sentence is neither a critical stage of the proceeding affording the movant the constitutional guarantee to counsel nor a stage of the proceeding requiring counsel under N.D.R.Crim.P. 44(a).

Matter of J.M. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2019 ND 125
Docket No.: 20180278
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: The State did not establish clear and convincing evidence of a nexus between J.M.’s disorder and his sexual dangerousness to others.

Great Plains Royalty Corporation v. Earl Schwartz Company, et al. 2019 ND 124
Docket No.: 20180285
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Collateral estoppel generally forecloses relitigation, in a second action based on a different claim, of a particular issue of either fact or law which was litigated and determined in a prior suit.

Collateral estoppel applies to a party or a person in privity with a party to the prior adjudication, and a person is not in privity with a party to the prior suit if he acquired an interest in the subject matter affected by the prior adjudication through one of the parties before the prior adjudication.

When a dissolved corporation is reinstated, generally its rights and privileges are restored retroactively to the date of dissolution, except as to those rights and assets of which the corporation was divested prior to reinstatement, and the corporation is treated as if it had never been dissolved.

State v. Craig 2019 ND 123
Docket No.: 20180397
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A district court abused its discretion by scheduling a hearing on defendant’s motion and then cancelling the hearing without explanation leaving the defendant unable to complete a hearing request under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a)(3) on his own.

A district court judge’s ruling regarding the merits of the case or the law relating to the proceedings does not evidence bias to support reassignment on remand.

State v. Gardner 2019 ND 122
Docket No.: 20180239
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A claimant neither needs to be the addressee nor needs to live at the address on a package to claim a search and seizure right to the package. A claimant only needs to show a possessory interest in the package.

Ali v. State 2019 ND 121
Docket No.: 20190004
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: District court’s finding that an application for post-conviction relief failed to establish counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness was not clearly erroneous.

Curtiss v. State 2019 ND 120
Docket No.: 20180392
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court’s order denying application for post-conviction relief and order denying motions for reconsideration and to correct a sentence are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), (6), and (7).

Lavallie v. State 2019 ND 119
Docket No.: 20190007
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order summarily dismissing a post-conviction relief application is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of F.M.G. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2019 ND 118
Docket No.: 20190097
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Mental Health
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Continuing treatment order summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

State v. Johnson 2019 ND 117
Docket No.: 20180429
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court’s order denying a motion to return bond is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7).

Keller v. State 2019 ND 116
Docket No.: 20180391
Filing Date: 5/16/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Summary affirmance of district court’s denial of post-conviction relief.

Interest of T.A.G. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2019 ND 115
Docket No.: 20180374
Filing Date: 5/6/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The case is remanded for additional findings of fact on whether a person was likely to reoffend and had serious difficulty controlling behavior, as required to deny sex offender discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual.

Ayling v. Sens, et al. 2019 ND 114
Docket No.: 20180231
Filing Date: 4/25/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: An action barred by a statute of limitations generally is dismissed under the summary judgment standards of N.D.R.Civ.P. 56.

Determining when a cause of action accrues is normally a question of fact, but it becomes a question of law when the material facts are undisputed. Under the discovery rule the accrual of a claim is postponed until the plaintiff knew, or with the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known, of the wrongful act and its resulting injury.

Condon v. St. Alexius Medical Center, et al. 2019 ND 113
Docket No.: 20180297
Filing Date: 4/22/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Malpractice
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Section 32-42-02, N.D.C.C., does not violate the equal-protection provisions of N.D. Const. art. I, § 21.

The right to recover for personal injuries is an important substantive right subject to the intermediate standard of equal-protection analysis.

A district court’s decision whether to grant or deny a new trial under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59(b) rests entirely within its discretion, and review of a denial of a new trial motion is limited to deciding whether the court manifestly abused its discretion.

Testimony from a physician that a plaintiff’s medical condition is permanent and would worsen is sufficient to establish foundation for future medical expenses.

Evidence of medical expenses can be admitted without an expert medical opinion that the expenses were necessitated by the defendant’s conduct.

When considering claims of prejudicial misconduct, courts consider the nature of the comments the jury heard, their probable effect on the jury in the context of the entire trial, and the district court’s instructions to the jury.

A district court has discretion to balance the probative value of proffered evidence against the dangers enumerated in N.D.R.Ev. 403.

A district court does not abuse its discretion by admitting expert testimony whenever specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact, even if the expert does not possess a particular expertise or specific certification.

When the verdict is reasonably within the scope of the evidence presented and the instructions of the court, the plaintiff is entitled to have judgment entered upon the jury’s verdict.

Tschider v. Tschider, et al. 2019 ND 112
Docket No.: 20180104
Filing Date: 4/18/2019
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A premarital agreement may be unenforceable if it is unconscionable at the time of execution, at the time of separation or marital dissolution, or at the time of enforcement.

Whether a premarital agreement is unconscionable presents a question of law, but it turns on factual findings related to the relative property values, the parties’ financial circumstances, and their ongoing need.

A premarital agreement is a contract, and its interpretation is a question of law, which is reviewed de novo on the entire record on appeal.

A district court’s decisions regarding the division of marital property are treated as findings of fact and may be reversed on appeal if these findings are clearly erroneous.

The district court has broad discretion to award attorney fees in divorce proceedings.