Opinions

State v. Heywood 2022 ND 74
Docket No.: 20210259
Filing Date: 4/14/2022
Case Type: SEXUAL OFFENSE
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury found the defendant guilty of gross sexual imposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4).

Schauer v. Peterson 2022 ND 73
Docket No.: 20210250
Filing Date: 4/14/2022
Case Type: CHILD CUST & SUPPORT (Div.\Other)
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An amended judgment awarding a parent primary residential responsibility is summarily affirmed.

City of Bismarck v. Goodwin 2022 ND 72
Docket No.: 20210210
Filing Date: 4/14/2022
Case Type: DUI/DUS
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: When a defendant enters a conditional guilty plea, this Court reviews an adverse determination of a specified pretrial motion.

Reviewing a district court’s decision to reject jury instructions would be an advisory opinion.

Gaede v. State 2022 ND 71
Docket No.: 20210336
Filing Date: 4/14/2022
Case Type: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
Author: Per Curiam

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

Holmes v. State 2022 ND 70
Docket No.: 20210284
Filing Date: 4/14/2022
Case Type: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7).

Vacancy in Judgeship No. 2, SEJD 2022 ND 69
Docket No.: 20220082
Filing Date: 4/1/2022
Case Type:
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Judgeship retained at Valley City.

Interest of M.R. 2022 ND 68
Docket No.: 20210204
Filing Date: 3/31/2022
Case Type: JUVENILE LAW
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: The Court does not render advisory opinions, and an appeal will be dismissed if the issues become moot or academic, leaving no actual controversy to be determined.

An appeal is not moot if the district court’s decision continues to have collateral consequences for the appealing party. Collateral consequences cannot be too remote or speculative and cannot be duplicative of preexisting consequences.

Burris v. Burris 2022 ND 67
Docket No.: 20210178
Filing Date: 3/31/2022
Case Type: DIVORCE/PROPERTY DIV./ALIMONY
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An order denying the elimination or modification of a spousal support obligation affects a substantial right and can be appealed to this Court.

A voluntary payment of an award of attorney’s fees renders the issue moot and waives the party’s right to appeal that issue.

Whether there has been a material change in circumstances warranting modification or elimination of the spousal support obligation is subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review.

Section 14-05.24.1, N.D.C.C., dealing with spousal support awards, does not provide for retroactive effect. Where there was no change to a 2006 judgment, the statute cannot be applied retroactively.

Beck v. NDDOT 2022 ND 66
Docket No.: 20210312
Filing Date: 3/31/2022
Case Type: TRANSPORTATION DEPT.
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Section 39-08-01(1)(a), N.D.C.C., provides that a person may not drive or be in actual physical control of any vehicle upon a highway or upon public or private areas to which the public has a right of access for vehicular use in this state if that person has an alcohol concentration of at least eight one-hundredths of one percent by weight at the time of the performance of a chemical test within two hours after the driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle.

At an administrative hearing, a report and notice form is prima facie evidence of its contents, including the time of driving. The time of driving may be placed into question at the administrative hearing, such as by cross-examining the testifying officer at the hearing.

While reasonable inferences can be drawn from the evidence at an administrative hearing, a reasoning mind must be able to reasonably find the Department met its burden of proving the chemical test was administered within two hours of the time of the driving.

St. Alexius Medical Center v. Nesvig, et al. 2022 ND 65
Docket No.: 20220005
Filing Date: 3/17/2022
Case Type: WRIT OF SUPERVISION (Civil)
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: This Court’s power to issue supervisory writs is discretionary and is used only to rectify errors and prevent injustice where no adequate alternative remedy exists.

Peer review records are privileged and not subject to discovery in any civil action.

When a party withholds discoverable information because it is privileged, the party must expressly make a claim of privilege and describe the nature of the documents in a manner that, without revealing the information, enables other parties to assess the claim.

We look first at the words of the peer review statute, then determine how they apply to the procedure established by N.D.R.Civ.P. 26.

District Courts have discretion to conduct an in camera review of documents if a party challenges a claim of privilege identified in an adequate privilege log.