Opinions

Brown v. Montana-Dakota Utilities Co., et al. 2011 ND 38
Docket No.: 20100220
Filing Date: 2/14/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A municipality may enact ordinances allowing it to terminate a resident's services due to nonpayment for services.
A utility company may combine balances from a customer's separate accounts and terminate services if the combined balance remains unpaid, as long as the balances are from services of the same class and for the same customer.
A customer has received personal notice by delivery, as required by regulations, when it is evident on the record the customer was aware of an unpaid utility balance and the utility company's intent to disconnect services.

Hildenbrand v. Capital RV Center, Inc. 2011 ND 37
Docket No.: 20100118
Filing Date: 2/11/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The law of the case doctrine and the scope of the parties' appeal define the parameters of appellate review.
A district court has broad discretion over the nature and scope of written questions submitted to the jury.
Contract provisions may establish entitlement to possession for conversion purposes.
The invocation of the shorthand expression "meeting of the minds" is more misleading than helpful in deciding contract issues.
A failure to explicitly request specific equitable relief is not fatal to a court's grant of equitable relief.

Sorenson v. Alinder, et al. 2011 ND 36
Docket No.: 20100254
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Under North Dakota's abandoned mineral statutes, the requirement of mailing a notice of lapse under N.D.C.C. 38-18.1-06(2) requires a "reasonable inquiry" only when the mineral owner's address does not appear of record.

Eaton v. State 2011 ND 35
Docket No.: 20100235
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: The sufficiency of the factual basis to support a guilty plea is a question of law on appeal from a summary denial of an application of post-conviction relief, where the parties agree there were no disputed issues of fact.
Courts in post-conviction relief proceedings may consider information from the plea proceedings in addition to the factual basis presented to ensure there was a sufficient factual basis to support the guilty plea.
A court does not improperly infer an intent to deliver a controlled substance while establishing a factual basis to support a guilty plea, where the court relies on evidence of possession of a significant amount of the controlled substance and other items suggesting an intent to deliver.

Johnson, et al. v. Taliaferro, et al. 2011 ND 34
Docket No.: 20100314
Filing Date: 2/8/2011
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Subsequently enacted legislation cannot take away a vested right.

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.