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.
4201 - 4300 of 12370 results
|
State v. Kraft
2010 ND 181 Highlight: Judgment of conviction of manufacturing methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Darby v. State
2010 ND 180 Highlight: District court amended order denying an application for post-conviction relief summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Penor
2010 ND 179 Highlight: Criminal judgment for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Interest of B.B. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 178 Highlight: District court judgment terminating parental rights instead of ordering a guardianship is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4). |
|
State v. Jackson
2010 ND 177 Highlight: Driving under suspension conviction summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). |
|
Rayas v. Marchus, et al.
2010 ND 176 Highlight: Dismissal of case barred by the applicable statute of limitations is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
|
Thompson v. Jaeger
2010 ND 174
Highlight: A word or a phrase repeated in a constitutional provision is generally given the same meaning throughout the constitution. |
|
Adoption of S.M.G. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 173
Highlight: A district court's decision cannot be reviewed when the court does not provide any indication of the evidentiary and theoretical basis for its decis |
|
Interest of S.L.W. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 172
Highlight: An alleged father cannot, in a subsequent paternity action, challenge a prior judgment disestablishing the paternity of a presumed or adjudicated father based upon an allegation that the prior action was barred by the statute of limitations. |
|
Interest of Maedche
2010 ND 171 Highlight: North Dakota's commitment of sexually dangerous individuals statute is not unconstitutionally void for vagueness. |
|
Kannianen v. White
2010 ND 170 Highlight: When interpreting the language of a prior judgment, a court must presume that the original trial judge considered existing statutes and relevant caselaw, and intended the judgment to conform to the applicable legal standards. |
|
Investors Title Insurance Co. v. Herzig, et al. (Cross-Ref w/20090051)
2010 ND 169
Highlight: In construing a trust agreement, the primary objective is to ascertain the settlor's intent. |
|
Hector v. City of Fargo
2010 ND 168 Highlight: North Dakota law authorizes the creation of special improvement districts that include land outside the limits of a municipality. |
|
Ackre v. Chapman & Chapman, P.C.
2010 ND 167
Highlight: To have standing, a litigant must have suffered some threatened or actual injury resulting from the putatively illegal action, the asserted harm must not be a generalized grievance shared by all or a large class of citizens, and the litigant generally must assert his or her own legal rights and interests and cannot rest a claim for relief on the legal rights and interests of third parties. |
|
Schwarz, et al. v. Gierke
2010 ND 166
Highlight: A denial of a motion to compel arbitration is reviewed under the de novo standard, unless the lower court's decision was based on factual findings, in which case the clearly erroneous standard applies. |
|
Peterson v. Peterson
2010 ND 165
Highlight: In awarding spousal support, the district court must consider the relevant factors of the Ruff-Fischer guidelines. |
|
Bala, et al. v. State
2010 ND 164
Highlight: Eminent domain takes property because it is useful to the public, while the police power regulates the use of, or impairs rights in, property to prevent detriment to the public interest, and constitutional provisions against taking private property for public use without just compensation impose no barrier to the proper exercise of the police power. |
|
Matter of A.M. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 163
Highlight: Before an individual may be committed to the state hospital as a "sexually dangerous individual," the State must prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) the individual has engaged in sexually predatory conduct; (2) the individual has a congenital or acquired condition that is manifested by a sexual disorder, a personality disorder, or other mental disorder or dysfunction; (3) the condition makes the individual likely to engage in further acts of sexually predatory conduct which constitute a danger to the physical or mental health or safety of others; and (4) the individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior. |
|
Murphy v. Rossow
2010 ND 162
Highlight: A final judgment can be amended if it was the product of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. |
|
Snyder v. Snyder
2010 ND 161
Highlight: A divorcing party near retirement is not per se entitled to a reduced support obligation upon retirement. When substantial uncertainty surrounds a future retirement, the proper remedy is to move for modification upon retirement. |
|
Matter of J.D.F. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 160
Highlight: Rule 2.2, N.D.R.App.P., applies only to appeals from orders terminating parental rights. |
|
Estate of Cashmore
2010 ND 159
Highlight: Once a final judgment or order has been entered approving a final accounting and distribution of estate property, the estate proceedings are concluded and the parties are not authorized to file a petition to approve an amended final accounting under the statute. |
|
Lechler v. Lechler
2010 ND 158
Highlight: In a custody dispute, a court may interview children in chambers provided no party objects. |
|
Interest of M.G. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 157 Highlight: Long-term and intensive treatment for a parent is not required if it cannot be successfully undertaken in time to enable the children to be returned to the parental home without causing severe dislocation from emotional attachments formed during long-term foster care. |
|
Praus v. Praus
2010 ND 156
Highlight: Procedural unconscionability focuses on the formation of a settlement agreement and the fairness of the bargaining process, while substantive unconscionability focuses on the harshness or one-sidedness of the agreement's provisions. |
|
Zutz, et al. v. Kamrowski, et al.
2010 ND 155 Highlight: Under Minnesota law, a county attorney's statutory duties include providing advice to county commissioners, and an absolute privilege attaches to allegedly defamatory statements made in a contract investigator's report to a county attorney on matters involved in a county commission's request for advice. |
|
Matter of A.M.W. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 154
Highlight: A party seeking termination of the parent-child relationship in the context of an adoption must prove the elements necessary to support termination by clear and convincing evidence. |
|
Kortum, et al. v. Johnson, et al. (Cross-Ref w/20070186)
2010 ND 153
Highlight: Issues which are beyond the scope of a remand in a prior appeal will not be addressed in a subsequent appeal after remand. |
|
State v. Hammer
2010 ND 152
Highlight: A bank customer does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in bank records, and the Fourth Amendment does not apply when the government obtains the customer's records from the bank by subpoena. |
|
Huber v. Farmer's Union Service Ass'n, et al.
2010 ND 151
Highlight: A provision of a contract must in and of itself be inherently illegal to be unlawful for purposes of N.D.C.C. 9-08-01. |
|
Richter v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2010 ND 150
Highlight: A stop or seizure occurs under the Fourth Amendment when a law enforcement officer has in some way restrained the liberty of a citizen, and the mere approach and questioning of a person in a parked vehicle may not constitute a stop or seizure. |
|
S.H.B. v. T.A.H. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 149
Highlight: To establish abandonment under N.D.C.C. 27-20-02(1)(a), a petitioner seeking termination of a parent's parental rights must show that the parent intended to abandon the child. |
|
Pembina Co. Water Resource Brd. v. Cavalier Co. Water Resource Brd.
2010 ND 148 Highlight: A petitioner for a writ of mandamus must demonstrate that there is no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. |
|
Interest of R.S. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 147 Highlight: Under N.D.C.C. 27-20-02(8)(a), "deprived child" means "a child who . . . [i]s without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care or control necessary for the child's physical, mental, or emotional health, or morals, and the deprivation is not due primarily to the lack of financial means of the child's parents, guardian, or other custodian." |
|
Petition to Change Judgeship No. 4 Chambers from New Rockford to Carrington
2010 ND 145 |
|
Petition to Change Judgeship No. 4 Chambers from New Rockford to Lisbon
2010 ND 145 |
|
Judicial Vacancy in Judgeship No. 4, SEJD (see 20100169 and 20100174)
2010 ND 145 Highlight: Judgeship retained at New Rockford. |
|
State v. Blunt (cross-reference w/20070247)
2010 ND 144
Highlight: In determining what constitutes an acquittal, the label used by the district court is not conclusive and the reviewing court will consider the substance of the district court's ruling to determine whether it actually represents a resolution of some or all of the factual elements of the offense charged. |
|
Woodward v. Woodward (Cross-Ref w/20080343 & 20090053)
2010 ND 143
Highlight: A district court judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, and the test for appearance of impartiality is one of reasonableness and recusal is not required in response to spurious or vague charges of impartiality. |
|
Reciprocal Discipline of Kenny
2010 ND 142 Highlight: Lawyer reprimanded under Rule 4.4, N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl., governing reciprocal discipline. |
|
Thornton v. Klose
2010 ND 141
Highlight: A temporary child support order amending a prior divorce judgment and setting the parties' child support obligations for a period of one year is appealable. |
|
Melchior v. Lystad, et al.
2010 ND 140
Highlight: Summary judgment is appropriate if either litigant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law and if no dispute exists as to either the material facts or the inferences to be drawn from undisputed facts, or if resolving factual disputes will not alter the result. |
|
State v. Meador
2010 ND 139
Highlight: The retroactive application of the sexual offender registration statute is remedial and non-punitive and does not violate federal or state constitutional prohibitions against ex post facto laws. |
|
Investors Title Insurance Co. v. Herzig, et al. (Consol. w/20090052)
2010 ND 138
Highlight: If a party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished, the court may order substitution of the proper parties. |
|
State v. Poitra
2010 ND 137
Highlight: A defendant claiming statements in an affidavit for a search warrant are false or misleading because important information was omitted must show: (1) law enforcement omitted facts with the intent or in reckless disregard of whether they made the affidavit misleading, and (2) the affidavit would not have been sufficient to support a finding of probable cause if the omitted information had been included. |
|
Schirado v. Foote, et al.
2010 ND 136 Highlight: A nonparent seeking to qualify as a person acting as a parent under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act must claim a right to legal custody under the laws of North Dakota. At a minimum, this requires claiming right to legal custody prior to or simultaneous with commencement of the pending litigation. |
|
Interest of M.W. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 135
Highlight: When a child attains the age of twenty years, all juvenile court orders affecting the child then in force terminate and the child is discharged from further obligation or control. |
|
State v. Lehman
2010 ND 134
Highlight: To grant a judgment of acquittal, a court must find there is insufficient evidence to sustain a conviction. |
|
Halvorson, et al. v. Starr, et al.
2010 ND 133 Highlight: The computation of time for statutory notice of lapse of mineral interest is governed by N.D.C.C. 1-02-15, not the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure. |
|
State v. Irwin
2010 ND 132 Highlight: A defendant does not suffer a manifest injustice when pleading guilty to a fifth DUI in seven years, although at the time of arrest he has not yet been convicted of his fourth DUI in seven years. |
|
Interest of C.H. (Confidential)
2010 ND 131 Highlight: In determining whether an individual is a "person requiring treatment," a district court must consider (1) whether the individual is "mentally ill," and (2) whether there is a reasonable expectation that, if the individual is not hospitalized, there exists a serious risk of harm to himself, others, or property. |
|
Boeckel v. Boeckel
2010 ND 130 Highlight: Where evidence of domestic violence exists, the district court must make specific and detailed findings regarding the application of the presumption against awarding custody to the perpetrator of domestic violence. |
|
State v. Everett
2010 ND 129 Highlight: Revocation of probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
State v. Colby
2010 ND 128 Highlight: Criminal judgment summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Kuhn
2010 ND 127
Highlight: Lawyer suspended from the practice of law for ninety days and ordered to pay the costs and expenses of the proceeding for violating N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.14, Client With Limited Capacity. |
|
Workforce Safety & Insurance v. Auck
2010 ND 126
Highlight: In an administrative agency case, the factual findings from a final decision by an independent administrative law judge are reviewed under the same standard of review used for agency decisions. The legal conclusions from a final decision by an independent administrative law judge are not entitled to similar deference and are reviewed in the same manner as legal conclusions generally. |
|
Lenton v. Lenton
2010 ND 125
Highlight: When a finding of domestic violence is based solely on fear of physical harm, the fear must be of imminent physical harm. |
|
American Bank Center v. Schuh, et al.
2010 ND 124 Highlight: A party seeking relief from a default judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(i) must make some showing of why he was justified in failing to avoid mistake or inadvertence. |
|
State v. Bernsdorf
2010 ND 123 Highlight: The State cannot appeal a judgment of acquittal. |
|
Aurora Medical Park v. Kidney & Hypertension Center
2010 ND 122
Highlight: In an eviction action the right to the possession of the real estate is the only fact that can be rightfully litigated unless damages or rent is claimed. |
|
State v. Wanner
2010 ND 121
Highlight: The purpose of sequestration is to prevent one witness's testimony from influencing another. |
|
State v. Mohl
2010 ND 120 Highlight: An officer observing a vehicle touch the fog line approximately sixteen times and the center line approximately eight times in three miles has reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle. |
|
Brummund v. Brummund (Cross Ref w/ 20080170)
2010 ND 119 Highlight: Under the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, prospective spouses may contract with respect to their rights in the property of either or both of them whenever and wherever acquired, and may specify the disposition of property upon divorce. |
|
Burris Carpet Plus, Inc. v. Burris, et al.
2010 ND 118
Highlight: To prevail on a trademark infringement claim, a plaintiff must first show it has a valid mark that merits protection. |
|
State v. Emil (Consolidated w/20090287)
2010 ND 117
Highlight: The State may appeal from an order suppressing evidence only "when accompanied by a statement of the prosecuting attorney asserting that the appeal is not taken for purpose of delay and that the evidence is a substantial proof of a fact material in the proceeding." |
|
Holbach v. Holbach, et al.
2010 ND 116
Highlight: When a settlement agreement is wholly incorporated into a divorce judgment, the settlement is merged into the judgment and ceases to be independently viable. |
|
State v. Gunderson
2010 ND 115 Highlight: Order requiring restitution is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Ellis v. North Dakota State University
2010 ND 114 Highlight: When this Court has decided a legal question and remanded the case for further proceedings, the question will not be decided differently on a subsequent appeal in the same case where the facts remain the same. |
|
Hanneman v. Nygaard
2010 ND 113
Highlight: An involuntary dismissal of a plaintiff's action, which does not otherwise specify, operates as an adjudication on the merits. |
|
City of Mandan v. Gerhardt
2010 ND 112
Highlight: Permissible types of law enforcement-citizen encounters include: (1) arrests, which must be supported by probable cause; (2) "Terry" stops, seizures which must be supported by a reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity; and (3) community caretaking encounters, which do not constitute Fourth Amendment seizures. |
|
State v. McKay (Consolidated w/20090296 - 20090298 & 20090342)
2010 ND 111 Highlight: Judgment of conviction for aggravated assault and order revoking probation are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Martinson v. Martinson
2010 ND 110 Highlight: In deciding a request for attorney fees and costs under N.D.C.C. 14-05-23, a court must balance one party's needs against the other party's ability to pay and consider whether either party's actions unreasonably increased the time and expenditures on the case. |
|
State v. Bauer
2010 ND 109
Highlight: The nonexistence of self-defense instruction given by the trial court correctly provides that the burden of proof is on the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not acting in self-defense. |
|
State v. Dahl (consolidated w/20090262)
2010 ND 108
Highlight: A criminal defendant is incompetent to stand trial when he lacks sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding or when he lacks a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him. The essence of being able to consult with a lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding is the ability to coherently confer with counsel and provide necessary and relevant information to formulate a defense. |
|
Eberle v. Eberle
2010 ND 107
Highlight: A fee for transcript preparation for appellate review is properly taxed by the clerk as a necessary disbursement for the prevailing party on appeal. |
|
State v. Clark (Consolidated w/20090234-20090238)
2010 ND 106
Highlight: When no plea is taken and judgment is pronounced on the theory that a guilty plea has been entered, the judgment is a nullity and thus void. |
|
State v. Pixler (Consolidated w/20090311)
2010 ND 105
Highlight: The age, education, and mental capacity of the defendant, his background and experience, and his conduct at the time of the alleged waiver are probative factors bearing on whether an accused has validly waived counsel and pled guilty. |
|
Estate of Eggl
2010 ND 104
Highlight: In an unsupervised probate, a district court order settling all of a claimant's claims is appealable without a N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) certification. |
|
Interest of D.H. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 103 Highlight: Parental rights may be terminated when a child is deprived, and the court finds (1) that the conditions and causes of the deprivation are likely to continue, and (2) that such continued deprivation will probably cause the child to suffer serious physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm. |
|
M.M., et al. v. Fargo Public School Dist. #1, et al.
2010 ND 102
Highlight: The recreational use immunity statutes do not bar suits against school districts brought by students injured on school grounds during the school day. |
|
State ex. rel. Schlect v. Wolff
2010 ND 101
Highlight: An appellate court will not engage in unassisted searches through parties' briefs for a rationale supporting a court's decision. |
|
Paulson v. Paulson
2010 ND 100
Highlight: Because a discretionary trust interest is an expectancy that gave no assurance of any future benefit, the trial court did not err in excluding the trust from the marital estate. |
|
Dutton v. Workforce Safety & Insurance
2010 ND 99
Highlight: A permanent partial impairment evaluation must be conducted by an independent, unbiased physician. |
|
Matter of Midgett (Cross-Ref w/20080255 & 20070109)
2010 ND 98 Highlight: Where the district court makes sufficiently detailed findings of fact, supported by the record, on whether a committed individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior, the reviewing court will not reverse on that issue. |
|
City of Fargo v. Knodle
2010 ND 97 Highlight: Judgment entered after defendant was found guilty of driving while under the influence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Wolff (Interim Suspension)
2010 ND 96 Highlight: Interim suspension of lawyer ordered. |
|
Botner v. Bismarck Parks, et al.
2010 ND 95
Highlight: Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment is a question of law reviewed de novo on the entire record. |
|
Sonnenberg v. Sonnenberg
2010 ND 94
Highlight: When an obligor owes a duty of support to at least one obligee, as well as a duty of support to a child living with the obligor who is not also a child of that obligee, the child support guidelines require that the district court make an allowance for the child living with the obligor. |
|
Estate of Loomer (cross ref. w/20070018)
2010 ND 93
Highlight: Partition is an equitable remedy governed by equitable principles, and district courts have wide judicial discretion in partition actions to do equity and to make a fair and just division of the property or proceeds between the parties. |
|
Skogen, et al. v. Hemen Township Board, et al.
2010 ND 92
Highlight: A township has a mandatory duty to construct or reconstruct a township road in a manner that does not obstruct the natural flow and drainage of surface waters in accordance with the stream crossing standards prepared by the department of transportation and the state engineer. |
|
Stenehjem, ex rel. v. Crosslands, Inc.
2010 ND 91
Highlight: For the purposes of the corporate farming law, "the land in question" refers to the entire tract purchased and requires the court to view the property as a single tract. |
|
State v. Moe
2010 ND 90 Highlight: The standard for reconciling a jury verdict is whether the verdict is legally inconsistent. Verdicts are not legally inconsistent when they can legally coexist and when the jury's findings are not clearly contrary to the evidence. |
|
State v. Smith
2010 ND 89
Highlight: Whether the trial court's findings of fact reach the level of probable cause is a question of law, fully reviewable on appeal. |
|
State ex rel. Harris v. Lee, et al.
2010 ND 88
Highlight: The Supreme Court exercises its authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously, and only to rectify errors and prevent injustice in extraordinary cases when no adequate alternative remedy exists. |
|
Dupay v. Dupay
2010 ND 87
Highlight: Proceeds from a personal injury settlement must be considered in calculating an obligor's income for child support purposes. |
|
Erickson, et al. v. Erickson, et al.
2010 ND 86
Highlight: A claim of constructive fraud requires reviewing the circumstances leading to the formation of the contract. |
|
Sheets v. Farhart Law Firm, et al.
2010 ND 85
Highlight: On appeal from a bench trial, a district court's findings of fact will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous. |
|
Interest of A.R. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 84
Highlight: A violation of the disorderly conduct statute does not necessarily depend on the particular content of the speech involved, but on the behavior. |
|
Arnegard, et al. v. Cayko, et al.
2010 ND 83
Highlight: The primary objective in interpreting a statute is to determine the intent of the legislature by first looking at the language of the statute and giving words their plain, ordinary, and commonly understood meaning, unless the words are defined in the code or the drafters clearly intended otherwise. |
|
State v. Gietzen
2010 ND 82
Highlight: After a chemical analysis is received into evidence, the propriety of the blood draw is a question of fact affecting the weight to be given the results of the chemical analysis. |