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.
301 - 400 of 12358 results
|
Interest of S.B.
2024 ND 56 Highlight: A juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
State v. Nelson
2024 ND 55 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
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. |
|
Dahms v. Legacy Plumbing
2024 ND 53
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. |
|
Whitetail Wave v. XTO Energy, et al.
2024 ND 52
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. |
|
Whitetail Wave v. XTO Energy, et al.
2024 ND 52 |
|
Interest of Y.R.
2024 ND 51 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 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 |
|
Adoption of R.E.M. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2024 ND 49 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
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. |
|
State v. Glaum
2024 ND 47
Highlight: A district court’s order denying a defendant’s withdrawal of guilty pleas is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Petro-Hunt v. Tank, et al.
2024 ND 46
Highlight: Assignments and deeds are interpreted in the same manner as contracts, with the primary purpose to ascertain and effectuate the parties’ or grantor’s intent. |
|
Vacancy in Judgeship No. 3, SCJD
2024 ND 45 Highlight: Judgeship retained at Washburn. |
|
Meuchel v. Red Trail Energy
2024 ND 44
Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a member’s request for certain information in a board-managed limited liability company under the applicable statute governing an LLC member’s right to information. |
|
Interest of A.P. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2024 ND 43 Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is reversed. The court’s findings on termination are clearly erroneous because the findings are not supported by evidence in the record. The juvenile court abused its discretion by relying on affidavits in the file that were not received into evidence. |
|
State v. Henderson
2024 ND 42 Highlight: A criminal judgment is reversed because the district court abused its discretion by admitting several trial exhibits that were not properly authenticated under N.D.R.Ev. 901 and are inadmissible hearsay that lacked sufficient foundation as records of regularly conducted activity under N.D.R.Ev. 803(6). |
|
State v. Henderson
2024 ND 42 |
|
Interest of R.K.
2024 ND 41 Highlight: A district court’s order continuing an individual’s treatment at the North Dakota State Hospital is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Interest of R.K.
2024 ND 41 |
|
Papenhausen v. ConocoPhillips Co.
2024 ND 40
Highlight: We answer two certified questions from the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota regarding North Dakota’s natural accumulation rule, which precludes liability for injuries caused by natural accumulations of snow and ice. The questions ask whether the accumulation rule extends to an oil well site in a rural area, and, if so, does it still apply if it conceals a condition substantially more dangerous than one normally associated with ice and snow. |
|
Papenhausen v. ConocoPhillips Co.
2024 ND 40 |
|
State v. Wiese
2024 ND 39
Highlight: Obvious error analysis does not apply to errors waived through the doctrine of invited error, unless a constitutional error is structural. |
|
State v. Wiese
2024 ND 39 |
|
Archambault v. State
2024 ND 38
Highlight: To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim under the Strickland test, the applicant must show: (1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. |
|
Weber v. NDDOT
2024 ND 37 Highlight: A driver arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol was provided a reasonable opportunity to consult with counsel when he was permitted to use his cellphone to call a third party to help contact an attorney and made no additional requests or attempts to contact counsel. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Pilch
2024 ND 35 Highlight: Lawyer disbarred. |
|
Garaas, et al. v. Petro-Hunt
2024 ND 34
Highlight: A dismissal without prejudice is appealable if the judgment has the practical effect of terminating litigation in the plaintiffs’ chosen forum. |
|
State v. Rinde
2024 ND 33
Highlight: The August 1, 2021 amendment to N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6) does not apply retroactively. |
|
State v. Rinde
2024 ND 33 |
|
NDIC v. Gould, et al.
2024 ND 32
Highlight: Lien priority usually is based on its date of perfection. |
|
Nelson v. Nelson, et al.
2024 ND 31
Highlight: A district court must weigh all four Stout-Hawkinson factors when determining whether a moving parent can relocate to a different state with the children. |
|
Williams v. Vraa, et al.
2024 ND 30
Highlight: A court’s determination that a petitioner did not establish a prima facie case to support an award of nonparent visitation is reviewed de novo. |
|
State v. Fischer
2024 ND 29
Highlight: A district court can accept a guilty plea without accepting a plea agreement. When considering a plea agreement, the court can reject a guilty plea until it accepts the plea agreement or sentences the defendant. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Spencer
2024 ND 28 Highlight: Lawyer suspended and placed on two-year suspension with conditions. |
|
Keller v. Keller, et al.
2024 ND 27
Highlight: A district court’s finding of contempt will only be overturned if the court abused its discretion. |
|
WSI v. Kringlie, et al.
2024 ND 26
Highlight: Under the Administrative Agencies Practice Act, courts exercise limited appellate review of administrative agency decisions. |
|
Don's Garden Center, et al. v. The Garden District, et al.
2024 ND 25
Highlight: There is not a time limit for a motion attacking a void judgment under Rule 60(b)(4), N.D.R.Civ.P. |
|
Don's Garden Center, et al. v. The Garden District, et al.
2024 ND 25 |
|
Sherwood v. Sherwood
2024 ND 24
Highlight: A district court has broad discretion over the presentation of evidence and conduct of a trial, including when to certify a hostile witness. |
|
Sherwood v. Sherwood
2024 ND 24 |
|
Estate of Heath
2024 ND 23
Highlight: A prerequisite to obtaining an order establishing the authority of a domiciliary foreign personal representative is proof of the authority to act as the personal representative in the foreign jurisdiction, meaning an active appointment in the foreign jurisdiction. |
|
Estate of Heath
2024 ND 23 |
|
Friends of the Rail Bridge, et al. v. N.D. Dep't of Water Resources, et al.
2024 ND 22 Highlight: For a district court to acquire subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal from an administrative agency decision, the appellant must satisfy the statutory requirements for perfecting an appeal. By statute, a person aggrieved by the Department of Water Resources’ action or decision must request a hearing within 30 days and prior to appealing. An information-gathering public meeting is not an adjudicative proceeding hearing. |
|
Friends of the Rail Bridge, et al. v. N.D. Dep't of Water Resources, et al.
2024 ND 22 |
|
Mahad v. WSI, et al.
2024 ND 21
Highlight: The time to appeal a final administrative order begins when notice of the final order is mailed. |
|
Lyons v. State
2024 ND 19
Highlight: The requirements of the Uniform Postconviction Procedure Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 29-32.1, must be satisfied before an applicant can obtain relief under the Act. |
|
State v. Good Bear
2024 ND 18
Highlight: In determining if an out-of-court statement is admissible, the district court must first determine if the statement qualifies as hearsay under the rules of evidence. If not hearsay, then the statement is admissible; if it is hearsay, the court must then determine if it qualifies as an exception to the hearsay rule as outlined in the N.D.R.Ev. 803 and N.D.R.Ev. 804. |
|
Landis v. State
2024 ND 17
Highlight: This Court only decides those issues which are thoroughly briefed and argued, and a party waives an issue by not providing adequate supporting argument. |
|
LAWC Holdings v. Vincent Watford
2024 ND 16
Highlight: Whether a party has breached a contract is a finding of fact, which will not be reversed on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous. |
|
Pinks, et al. v. Kelsch, et al.
2024 ND 15 Highlight: A two-pronged test is used when determining whether an interlocutory order is appealable. First, the order appealed from must meet one of the statutory criteria of appealability set forth in N.D.C.C. § 28-27-02. If it does, then Rule 54(b) under the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure must be complied with. An appeal will not be considered in a multi-claim or multi-party case which disposes of fewer than all claims against all parties unless the district court has first independently assessed the case and determined that a Rule 54(b) certification is appropriate. |
|
Swanson v. State
2024 ND 14 Highlight: An order denying a petition for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Interest of R.S.
2024 ND 13 Highlight: A district court’s order for continuing hospitalization is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Interest of R.S.
2024 ND 13 |
|
Stancel v. Stancel, et al.
2024 ND 12 Highlight: A district court divorce judgment and order denying cross motions for contempt are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Plaisimond v. State
2024 ND 11 Highlight: A district court’s order for denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Estate of Lindberg
2024 ND 10
Highlight: Before we consider the merits of an appeal, we must first confirm we have jurisdiction. A motion filed under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59(j) and 60(b)(6) within 28 days of the notice of entry of judgment or order tolls the time to appeal under N.D.R.App.P. 4(a)(3)(A)(iv) and (vi). |
|
Interest of J.C. (CONFIDENTIAL)(consolidated w/ 20230378)
2024 ND 9 Highlight: A juvenile court errs when it relies on facts which are outside of the evidentiary record when exercising its discretion to terminate parental rights. |
|
Hoover v. NDDOT
2024 ND 8 Highlight: An administrative agency does not afford a petitioner a fair hearing when the agency receives exhibits into evidence without first providing the petitioner the opportunity to examine them. |
|
State v. Williamson
2024 ND 7 Highlight: Section 12.1-32-02(2), N.D.C.C., requires a district court include any credit for sentence reductions in the criminal judgment. |
|
State v. Williamson
2024 ND 7 |
|
State v. Salou
2024 ND 6
Highlight: Rule 28(b)(7)(B), N.D.R.App.P., requires an appellant’s brief to have a statement of the applicable standard of review and a citation to the record showing that the issue was preserved for review, or a statement of grounds for seeking review of an issue that was not preserved. A preserved evidentiary issue is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard, and an unpreserved evidentiary issue is reviewed for obvious error. |
|
State v. Gietzen
2024 ND 5
Highlight: The State’s accompanying statement filed with the notice of appeal must explain the relevance of the suppressed evidence and not merely paraphrase the statutory language. But the Court may consider the appeal if the facts clearly demonstrate the relevance of the suppressed evidence. |
|
State v. Gonzalez
2024 ND 4
Highlight: The August 1, 2021 amendment to N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6) does not apply retroactively. |
|
Yalartai v. Miller, et al.
2024 ND 3 Highlight: An order issued without notice to the parties is not appealable under N.D.C.C. § 28-27-02(7). Relief from an order made without notice must first be sought in the district court. |
|
Larson Latham Huettl v. Vetter
2024 ND 2
Highlight: An appeal from a district court judgment entered after a bench trial on a claim for unpaid legal fees and counterclaim is affirmed, and remanded for consideration of attorney’s fees for this appeal. |
|
State v. A.J.H. (consolidated w/20230242)
2024 ND 1 Highlight: A district court order transferring the matter to juvenile court is not an order quashing an information providing the State the right to appeal. |
|
Anderson v. Lamm
2023 ND 249
Highlight: The Court does not issue advisory opinions and will ordinarily dismiss a moot appeal. An appeal is moot when there is no actual controversy left to be determined because events have occurred that make it impossible for the Court to issue relief. There is an exception to the rule against advisory opinions for appeals from district court decisions that continue to have adverse collateral consequences for an appellant. For the collateral consequences exception to apply, there must be a reasonable possibility that collateral consequences will occur. This requires an examination of the specific circumstances of a case. |
|
Mead v. Hatzenbeller
2023 ND 248
Highlight: A temporary restraining order is a type of injunction that is brief in duration and meant to maintain the status quo until the district court can make a determination on the merits of a petition. After a final order has been issued, questions concerning the propriety of earlier temporary injunctive orders are moot. |
|
Koon v. State
2023 ND 247
Highlight: A district court judgment denying an application for postconviction relief is affirmed. |
|
State v. Nelson (consolidated w/20230235)
2023 ND 246
Highlight: This Court’s review of a sentence is generally confined to whether the district court acted within the statutory sentencing limits or substantially relied on an impermissible factor. |
|
State v. Gai
2023 ND 245 Highlight: A criminal judgment revoking probation and resentencing a defendant is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Heywood v. State
2023 ND 244 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). |
|
Heywood v. State
2023 ND 244 |
|
Everett v. State
2023 ND 243
Highlight: An applicant for post-conviction relief has two years from when the conviction becomes final to apply for relief, unless newly discovered evidence is found. |
|
Gaede v. State
2023 ND 242 Highlight: An order denying a petition for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
|
Mathisen, et al. v. Becker-Johner
2023 ND 241 Highlight: A brief is deficient if it fails to raise a legal argument, including the authorities on which it relies. A district court order and judgment granting summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8). |
|
Mathisen, et al. v. Becker-Johner
2023 ND 241 |
|
Williams v. Williams, et al.
2023 ND 240
Highlight: Reopening the record is an evidentiary issue subject to the abuse of discretion standard. |
|
Grengs v. Grengs, et al.
2023 ND 239
Highlight: A principal that allows an ostensible agent act with apparent authority may be bound by the agent’s actions. |
|
Interest of J.M.M. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2023 ND 238 Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating a mother’s parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
Shift Services v. Ames Savage Water Solutions
2023 ND 237
Highlight: Once a contract has been entered into, mutual assent of the contracting parties is essential for any modification of the contract. |
|
State v. Serdahl
2023 ND 236 Highlight: A criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Powell, et al. v. Statoil Oil & Gas
2023 ND 235
Highlight: The obligation to pay royalties under an oil and gas lease is a contract contained in a conveyance or instrument affecting title to real property within the meaning of N.D.C.C. § 28-01-15(2). This ten-year statute of limitations applies to a claim for untimely payment of royalties under an oil and gas lease. |
|
Ebel, et al. v. Engelhart, et al.
2023 ND 234
Highlight: A district court judgment is reversed because the court misapplied the law by applying the statute of frauds when it was not specifically pled under N.D.R.Civ.P. 8. |
|
State v. Hamilton
2023 ND 233
Highlight: When a defendant pleads guilty on open and unconditional plea, the defendant waives his right to challenge the rejection of a plea agreement. |
|
Interest of Wedmore
2023 ND 232 Highlight: An appeal to determine if a person remains a sexually dangerous individual must be taken within 30 days of an entry of an order denying discharge. |
|
State v. Bearce
2023 ND 231
Highlight: A district court does not err when reducing a defendant’s sentence within the 120-day period mandated by Rule 35(b), N.D.R.Crim.P. |
|
Sargent Cty. Water Resource District v. Beck, et al.
2023 ND 230
Highlight: Res judicata prevents relitigation of claims that were raised, or could have been raised, in prior actions between the same parties or their privies. Collateral estoppel precludes litigation of issues actually litigated and necessary to the outcome of the prior case, even if such issues are subsequently presented as part of a different claim. Collateral estoppel requires a final judgment on the merits. |
|
Sargent Cty. Water Resource District v. Beck, et al.
2023 ND 230 |
|
Matter of Overboe (CONFIDENTIAL)
2023 ND 229 Highlight: Lawyer transferred to Incapacity to Practice Law Status |
|
Holm v. Holm
2023 ND 228 Highlight: The petitioner for a disorderly conduct restraining order bears the burden of demonstrating how a respondent’s conduct affected the petitioner’s safety, security, or privacy. Section 12.1-31.2-01, N.D.C.C., requires the district court to make specific findings concerning the respondent’s intent. |
|
State v. Haney (consolidated w/20220367)
2023 ND 227
Highlight: To successfully challenge the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, the defendant must show the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, permits no reasonable inference of guilt. |
|
State v. Haney (consolidated w/20220367)
2023 ND 227 |
|
Kisi v. State
2023 ND 226
Highlight: To be convicted of accomplice to attempted murder, the accused must have intended to aid in killing. Accomplice to attempted “knowing” murder under N.D.C.C. §§ 12.1-03-01 and 12.1-16-01(1)(a) is a non-cognizable offense. |
|
Pagel, et al. v. Weikum
2023 ND 224
Highlight: A district court order and judgment are reversed, and the case is remanded for entry of an order compelling arbitration. |
|
State v. Curtis
2023 ND 223
Highlight: The standard of review for a criminal trial before the district court without a jury is the same as a trial with a jury. A criminal defendant bears the burden of showing the evidence reveals no reasonable inference of guilt when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict. |
|
State v. Geiger
2023 ND 222 Highlight: A defendant fails to preserve an issue relating to constitutionally protected activities for appeal when they failed to properly raise a constitutionally protected activity defense to the district court through a motion in limine and instead made only a N.D.R.Crim.P. 29 motion at trial without providing any legal basis for the claim. |
|
State v. Richter
2023 ND 221 Highlight: Displaying a fictitious operator’s license is a punishable offense under N.D.C.C. § 39-06-40. |
|
State v. Steele
2023 ND 220
Highlight: A person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a closed, rented room. |