Opinions

Sorenson v. Felton 2011 ND 33
Docket No.: 20100256
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The word 'or' is disjunctive in nature and ordinarily indicates an alternative between different things or actions. Terms or phrases separated by 'or' have separate and independent significance.
When the letter of the law is clear and free from ambiguity, a court need look no further than the statutory language, and it is neither necessary nor appropriate to delve into legislative history to determine legislative intent.

Kalvoda v. Bismarck Public School Dist. #1 2011 ND 32
Docket No.: 20100320
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Original Proceeding - Civil - Writ of Mandamus
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: On appeal, the appellee is entitled to argue any grounds raised at the district court without cross-appealing, including those that were rejected. A cross-appeal is necessary only if the appellee seeks a more favorable result on appeal than it received in the district court.
The party seeking a writ of mandamus must demonstrate a clear legal right to performance of the acts sought and have no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.

Pember v. Shapiro 2011 ND 31
Docket No.: 20100149
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A district court may consider a mother's plan to relocate in making an initial custody award, but must do so within the best interests of the child factors.
A district court may make an initial custody award using the best interest of the child factors and proceed in the same judgment to consider the custodial parent's request to relocate with the children under the Stout-Hawkinson factors.
In calculating a parent's child support obligation, the district court must clearly set forth how it arrived at a net income figure and must credit any downward deviation for extended visitation for the entire year.

State v. Boespflug 2011 ND 30
Docket No.: 20100121
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: The Legislature did not explicitly designate the three-year age difference requirement under N.D.C.C. 12.1-20-01(3) as an affirmative defense.
The Legislature did not make the reasonableness of the defendant's belief of the age difference a part of the three-year age difference requirement under N.D.C.C. 12.1-20-01(3).

State v. Gomez 2011 ND 29
Docket No.: 20100100
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The use of special verdicts or general verdicts with special interrogatories is disfavored in criminal cases and the rules of criminal procedure generally do not provide for special verdicts or interrogatories.
Sexual contact, as defined in N.D.C.C. 12.1-20-02(5), includes any touching, whether through clothing or other covering, of the sexual parts of the person. The language of the statute does not limit sexual contact to any touching of the sexual parts of a child.
A criminal defendant has a constitutional right to a jury trial with an impartial jury selected from a representative cross-section of the community.
To establish a prima facie violation of the fair-cross-section requirement, a defendant must show that there was an underrepresentation of a distinctive group in jury venires and that the underrepresentation was due to systemic exclusion of the group in the jury-selection process.
A punishment in a non-capital case that is grossly disproportionate to the offense is cruel and unusual punishment.

Estate of Haugen 2011 ND 28
Docket No.: 20100165
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: When the entire estate is distributed to the surviving spouse under section 30.1-04-02, N.D.C.C., nothing is distributed under section 30.1-04-03, N.D.C.C.
The district court is required to make specific findings that allow meaningful appellate review.

Community Homes of Bismarck, Inc. v. Main 2011 ND 27
Docket No.: 20100095
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Landlord/Tenant
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A proper foundation must be established before witnesses may refer to notes or to other documents to refresh their memory, and the proper foundation requires witnesses to show a need to refresh their memory and to confirm the notes will assist them in refreshing their memory.
Opposing counsel has the right at trial to inspect a document used to refresh witnesses' recollections, to cross-examine the witnesses on the document, and to introduce relevant portions of the document into evidence.
A new written promise to pay a debt may revive a debt that is barred by the statute of limitations.
Whether a party has breached a lease is a finding of fact.

Whelan v. A.O. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2011 ND 26
Docket No.: 20100219
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law on whether a sexually dangerous individual's treatment program is the least restrictive treatment facility or program available must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.
An appellate court will address only those issues that are thoroughly briefed and argued. Mere assertions of unconstitutionality are insufficient to adequately raise a constitutional question.

Interest of L.D.M. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2011 ND 25
Docket No.: 20100137
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A trial court reviewing the civil commitment of a sexually dangerous individual must make sufficient factual findings to provide the appellate court with the basis for the court's decision.

Doll v. Doll 2011 ND 24
Docket No.: 20100133
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: On appeal from a trial court's award of primary residential responsibility, the evidence is not reweighed nor the credibility of witnesses reassessed.