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.
4301 - 4400 of 12382 results
|
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. |
|
Jacob v. State
2010 ND 81 Highlight: Proposed expert testimony must be viewed within the context of the other evidence and the overall conduct of the trial when a post-conviction relief petitioner alleges ineffective assistance of counsel. |
|
Perius v. Nodak Mutual Ins. Co., et al.
2010 ND 80
Highlight: Affidavits supporting and opposing a motion for summary judgment must be made on personal knowledge, set forth facts that would be admissible in evidence, and show affirmatively the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated in the affidavit. |
|
State v. Ebertz
2010 ND 79
Highlight: The Supreme Court has authority under N.D. Const. art. VI, sec. 3, to promulgate the procedural rules followed by the courts, and a procedural rule adopted by the Supreme Court prevails in a conflict with a statutory procedural rule. |
|
Delvo v. State
2010 ND 78 Highlight: Summary disposition of a post-conviction relief application is appropriate if the applicant, after being put on notice the State was putting him to his or her proof, fails to supplement the application with competent admissible evidence showing a genuine issue of material fact. |
|
Tarnavsky v. Rankin
2010 ND 77 Highlight: Order denying motion for relief from judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1),(4), and (7), and double costs, including reasonable attorney fees in the nominal amount of $500, are awarded to the appellee for defending a frivolous appeal. |
|
Riemers v. Eslinger, et al.
2010 ND 76 Highlight: Under Article I, section 13 of the Constitution of North Dakota, a person has the right to a jury trial for the alleged violation of a municipal ordinance when the ordinance authorizes a fine of twenty or more dollars. |
|
State v. Koenig
2010 ND 75 Highlight: A criminal judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding the defendant guilty of allowing livestock to run at large is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (3), and (4). |
|
Skarsgard v. State (consolidated w/20090334-20090336)
2010 ND 74 Highlight: Order denying applications for post-conviction relief summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Wery v. State
2010 ND 73 Highlight: Order denying application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
State v. Jackson
2010 ND 72 Highlight: A criminal judgment is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (3). |
|
State v. Tibor
2010 ND 71 Highlight: A trial court order denying the defendant's motion for a new trial is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Tarnavsky v. Tschider
2010 ND 70 Highlight: Summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (6). |
|
Schmidt, et al. v. Gateway Community Fellowship, et al.
2010 ND 69 Highlight: To assess recreational use immunity in cases where recreational purposes are mixed with nonrecreational purposes, the proper inquiry requires analysis of the totality of the circumstances and all relevant social and economic aspects of the activity, including the extrinsic nature of the activity, the type of service or commodity offered to the public, and the activity's purpose and consequence. |
|
Davidson v. State
2010 ND 68
Highlight: When a settlement agreement is merged into a judgment, the agreement is interpreted and enforced as a final judgment and not as a separate contract. |
|
Davis v. Davis
2010 ND 67
Highlight: Administrative rules are derivatives of statutes and are construed using well-established principles of statutory construction. |
|
State v. Loh (CONSOLIDATED W/20090099)
2010 ND 66
Highlight: Warrantless electronic monitoring and recording of a defendant's face-to-face conversations with a confidential informant, with the informant's consent, occurring in the informant's car does not violate North Dakota's constitutional search and seizure provision. |
|
Odom v. State (Consolidated w/ 20090249)
2010 ND 65 Highlight: On a post-conviction ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, if an appellant has failed to meet the first burden of proving that his counsel's representation fell outside of the wide range of reasonable professional assistance, it is unnecessary to address the argument that the appellant was prejudiced by his counsel's claimed deficient performance. |
|
Estate of Fisk
2010 ND 64
Highlight: The review of fees paid or taken by a personal representative is left to the sound discretion of the district court. |
|
State v. Wolfer
2010 ND 63
Highlight: The severity of a legal infraction is not relevant when determining whether the officer had reasonable and articulable suspicion to initiate a stop. |
|
Laib v. Laib
2010 ND 62 Highlight: An appellant who fails to raise an argument concerning a denied motion in an appeal cannot bring the same motion two years later and appeal its denial. |
|
State v. Fickert
2010 ND 61
Highlight: Where a defendant seeks to plead guilty over interactive video network ("IVN"), if defense counsel appears from a site separate from the defendant, the district court must (1) make a finding on the record that the defense counsel's participation from a separate site is necessary; (2) confirm on the record that the defendant has knowingly and voluntarily consented to defense counsel's participation from the separate site; and (3) allow confidential attorney-client communication if requested. |
|
RRMC Construction v. Bill Barth
2010 ND 60
Highlight: A district court does not err when it decides between two permissible views of the evidence. |
|
Wolfer v. N.D. Dept. of Transportation
2010 ND 59 Highlight: The Department of Transportation cannot unilaterally, without notice, decide to take the testimony of a witness telephonically at a hearing on the revocation or suspension of an individual's driving privileges. |
|
Morton County Social Service Board, et al. v. Cramer
2010 ND 58
Highlight: A stricter statutory standard for modifying custody applies when a motion to modify custody is made within two years of a prior order establishing custody. |
|
State v. M.B. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 57 Highlight: Whether a statute is unconstitutional is a question of law, and a statute will be upheld unless its challenger demonstrates the statute is unconstitutional. |
|
Seiler v. Dept. of Human Services
2010 ND 55
Highlight: An appeal from an administrative decision must challenge the agency's ultimate decision; otherwise, the court is called on to issue an impermissible advisory opinion. |
|
Hoffner v. Job Service N.D.
2010 ND 54 Highlight: Judgment affirming Job Service North Dakota's denial of unemployment benefits is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
|
State v. Smestad (consolidated w/20090272, 20090273, & 20090303)
2010 ND 53 Highlight: Criminal judgments entered upon guilty pleas of theft of property and an order revoking probation are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
State v. Delaney
2010 ND 52 Highlight: District court judgment entered after a jury found defendant guilty of abuse or neglect of a child is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Mertz v. 999 Quebec, Inc., et al.
2010 ND 51 Highlight: An order granting summary judgment is not appealable, but an attempted appeal from an order granting summary judgment will be treated as an appeal from a subsequently entered consistent judgment, if one exists. |
|
Great Western Bank v. Willmar Poultry Co.
2010 ND 50
Highlight: Statutory lien laws are remedial and will be liberally construed to effectuate their purpose of protecting those who contribute labor, skill, or materials. |
|
Home of Economy v. Burlington Northern (Cross Ref. w/20070002 & 20040267)
2010 ND 49
Highlight: The party asserting the existence of a public road by prescription bears the burden of proving the general, continuous, uninterrupted, and adverse use of the road by the public under a claim of right for twenty years. |
|
Jarick Products v. MID AM Group, et al.
2010 ND 48 Highlight: District court order denying Peterson's motion to vacate a default judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Van Beek, et al. v. Umber, et al.
2010 ND 47 Highlight: A trial court's award of attorney's fees and costs under N.D.C.C. 28-26-31 is discretionary, but the court's exercise of that discretion must be based on evidence that the pleadings were made without reasonable cause and not in good faith, and are found to be untrue. |
|
Interest of K.J., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL) (consolidated w/20090265)
2010 ND 46
Highlight: A juvenile court may terminate parental rights if there is clear and convincing evidence: (1) the child is a deprived child; (2) the conditions and causes of the deprivation are likely to continue; and (3) the child is suffering, or will in the future probably suffer serious physical, mental, moral or emotional harm.. |
|
Harris v. Harris
2010 ND 45
Highlight: There is no statute or rule authorizing an appeal to district court from a magistrate's decision on a disorderly conduct restraining order. |
|
Westby v. Schmidt, et al.
2010 ND 44
Highlight: Flaws and weaknesses in an expert witness's opinion go to the weight the trier of fact should give the opinion and not its admissibility. |
|
State ex rel. Dept. of Labor v. Riemers, et al.
2010 ND 43 Highlight: A party who fails to appeal from an order denying a motion for relief from judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) waives any issues covered therein and may not simply file a second N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion on the same grounds in lieu of an appeal. |
|
Zimmerman v. WSI, et al.
2010 ND 42 Highlight: An injured worker may be entitled to temporary partial disability benefits for a cumulative total of five years. |
|
Dunn v. ND Dept. of Transportation
2010 ND 41
Highlight: Judicial estoppel prohibits a party from taking inconsistent or contradictory positions during litigation. |
|
McAllister v. McAllister, et al.
2010 ND 40
Highlight: Granting visitation to a third party is a lesser intrusion on a parent's constitutional right to the custody and companionship of his or her children than granting decisionmaking responsibility and primary residential responsibility to a third party. |
|
State v. Dudley
2010 ND 39
Highlight: Under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment, a law enforcement officer may search a vehicle without a warrant if the officer has probable cause. |
|
Tweed v. State
2010 ND 38
Highlight: To obtain post-conviction relief on the basis of newly discovered evidence, the petitioner must demonstrate (1) the evidence was discovered after trial; (2) the failure to learn about the evidence at the time of trial was not the result of a lack of diligence; (3) the newly discovered evidence is material to issues at trial; and (4) the weight and quality of the evidence would likely result in an acquittal. |
|
Oie v. State
2010 ND 37 Highlight: Order dismissing application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
|
State v. Henrickson
2010 ND 36 Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury found the defendant guilty of escape is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7). |
|
Parisien v. Parisien
2010 ND 35
Highlight: A district court may award spousal support to a party in a divorce action for any period of time. Spousal support determinations are findings of fact and will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. |
|
Davis v. Enget, et al.
2010 ND 34
Highlight: In legal malpractice claims, expert testimony is generally required to establish the applicable standard of care and whether an attorney's conduct fell below that standard. |
|
Wolt v. Wolt (cross ref. 20090103)
2010 ND 33
Highlight: A district court's finding of domestic violence is a finding of fact that will not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous. A domestic violence protection order petitioner must prove "actual or imminent domestic violence" by a preponderance of the evidence. |
|
Hagerott v. Morton Co. Bd. of Commissioners
2010 ND 32
Highlight: A person is aggrieved and has standing to appeal a county commission zoning decision if the person has some legal interest that may be enlarged or diminished by the decision appealed from. |
|
Dufner v. Trottier (Consolidated w/20090251; Cross-Ref. with 20010163)
2010 ND 31
Highlight: Prolonged exposure to adult conflict is not in a child's best interests. |
|
State v. Byzewski (CONSOLIDATED WITH 20090151)
2010 ND 30
Highlight: Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2), "a defendant may enter a conditional plea of guilty, reserving in writing the right to have an appellate court review an adverse determination of a specified pretrial motion." |
|
State v. Addai
2010 ND 29
Highlight: During a stop of a vehicle, a law enforcement officer seizes every person in the vehicle, and therefore a passenger in the vehicle may challenge the legality of the stop. |
|
Petition of Berger
2010 ND 28
Highlight: When a minor is involved, the requirement that the district court determine whether there is "proper and reasonable cause" for a proposed name change necessarily includes consideration of the best interests of the child. |
|
sather
2010 ND 27
Highlight: The First Amendment does not apply to "fighting words" that are likely to incite a breach of the peace or provoke a violent reaction. |
|
Wolt v. Wolt (cross ref. 20090126)
2010 ND 26
Highlight: The district court has substantial discretion in making a custody determination, but it must consider all of the staturtory factors. |
|
Fleck v. Fleck
2010 ND 24
Highlight: Appellate review is especially deferential to a district court's difficult decision on primary residential responsibility when it involves two fit parents. |
|
Nelson v. Johnson
2010 ND 23
Highlight: Special statutory procedures are exempt from the rules of civil procedure insofar as those statutory procedures are inconsistent with the rules. |
|
Grinnell Mutual Ins. Co. v. Thompson, et al.
2010 ND 22 Highlight: The Financial Responsibility Laws do not set minimum levels of insurance coverage for nonpermissive operators. |
|
Judicial Vacancy in Judgeship No. 6, East Central Judicial District
2010 ND 21 Highlight: Judgeship retained at Fargo. |
|
Halberg v. Halberg
2010 ND 20
Highlight: A proper finding of net income is essential to determine the correct amount of child support under the child support guidelines. |
|
State v. Stridiron (consolidated w/20090093)
2010 ND 19
Highlight: A district court's decision to consolidate offenses or its refusal to grant a separate trial will not be set aside on appeal unless the defendant establishes a clear abuse of discretion. |
|
Isaacson v. Isaacson
2010 ND 18
Highlight: Courts determine actual controversies and will not act in an advisory capacity to decide mooted questions or abstract propositions. |
|
Matter of Voisine
2010 ND 17
Highlight: A person can be committed as a sexually dangerous individual when the State demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the three-prong commitment analysis has been satisfied. The first prong requires a showing that the individual has engaged in sexually predatory conduct. The second prong requires a showing that the individual has a congenital or acquired condition that is manifested by a sexual disorder, a personality disorder, or other mental disorder or dysfunction. The third prong requires a showing that the individual is likely to engage in further acts of sexually predatory conduct and that the individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior. |
|
Rakowski v. City of Fargo
2010 ND 16 Highlight: When a party fails to file a timely appeal from an adverse decision of a local zoning board, the decision is final and the party may not collaterally attack the decision in a different proceeding. |
|
City v. Bullinger
2010 ND 15
Highlight: A driver need not consent to the location where a blood draw for purposes of testing blood alcohol content will be conducted. |
|
Cartier, et al. v. Northwestern Electric, Inc.
2010 ND 14
Highlight: A denial of a motion for new trial is reviewed under the abuse-of-discretion standard. |
|
Shotbolt v. N.D. Workforce Safety and Insurance
2010 ND 13
Highlight: The clear intent of N.D.C.C. ch. 65-05.1 is to rehabilitate an injured worker so the worker may return to substantial gainful employment, meaning actual rehabilitation with a realistic opportunity to return to work. |
|
Reciprocal Discipline of Varriano (cross ref. 20090258)
2010 ND 12 Highlight: Suspension of lawyer ordered. |
|
Lamb v. State Board of Law Examiners
2010 ND 11
Highlight: Admission to Practice Rule 13 is neither subordinate to N.D.C.C. 44-04-18 nor unconstitutional under N.D. Const. art. XI, sec. 6. |
|
State v. Thompson
2010 ND 10
Highlight: At trial, a party must renew an objection made in a pretrial motion to exclude evidence to properly preserve the issue for appellate review. |
|
Interest of B.B. (CONFIDENTIAL) (Cross Ref w/20070233)
2010 ND 9
Highlight: A pattern of parental conduct can form a basis for a reasonable prediction of future behavior. |
|
Matter of Hanenberg
2010 ND 8 Highlight: The definition of a sexually dangerous individual, in addition to the three statutory requirements, requires a nexus between the disorder and dangerousness, including evidence showing the individual to be committed has serious difficulty controlling his behavior, which distinguishes a sexually dangerous individual from other dangerous persons. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Askew
2010 ND 7
Highlight: Disciplinary proceedings are reviewed de novo on the record. |
|
Horob v. Farm Credit Services of N.D., et al.
2010 ND 6
Highlight: Under the Uniform Commercial Code a security agreement may create a security interest in after-acquired collateral and may provide that the collateral will secure any obligation, including all existing and future loans or advances. |
|
Heinle v. Heinle
2010 ND 5
Highlight: A district court may determine the proper weight to assign to a custody investigator's recommendations, and the court's award of custody will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous. |
|
Everett v. State
2010 ND 4 Highlight: Judgment denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7). |
|
State v. Jensen
2010 ND 3
Highlight: A probationer's right to counsel at a revocation of probation hearing is statutorily based. |
|
Edwards v. Edwards
2010 ND 2 |
|
Judicial Vacancy in Judgeship No. 1, Northwest Judicial District
2010 ND 1 Highlight: Judgeship retained at Williston. |
|
Interest of W.K. (Confidential)
2009 ND 218
Highlight: A district court may order involuntary treatment and hospitalization or involuntary treatment with medication only if the court finds a person qualifies as a "person requiring treatment" as defined by N.D.C.C. 25-03.1-02(12). |
|
Lucas v. Riverside Park Condominiums Unit Owners Association
2009 ND 217
Highlight: Adverse rulings alone are not evidence of judicial bias or partiality. |
|
Judicial Vacancy in Judgeship No. 5, South Central Judicial District
2009 ND 216 Highlight: Judgeship retained at Bismarck. |
|
State v. Moore
2009 ND 215 Highlight: District court order setting restitution and amending criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Woodward v. Woodward (Consolidated w/ 20090053)
2009 ND 214
Highlight: Civil contempt requires a willful and inexcusable intent to violate a court order, and a complainant must clearly and satisfactorily show that the alleged contempt has been committed. |
|
Minto Grain, et al. v. Tibert, et al.
2009 ND 213
Highlight: The district court's decision on a motion for judgment as a matter of law is fully reviewable on appeal under the same standard as the district court, examining the sufficiency of the evidence viewing the evidence supporting the jury verdict as true, and deciding whether that evidence is so insufficient, reasonable minds could reach only one conclusion. |
|
Dunford v. Tryhus
2009 ND 212
Highlight: Statutes of limitations are a legal bar to a cause of action and begin to run when the underlying cause of action accrues. Accrual typically occurs at the commission of the wrongful act giving rise to the cause of action, and an injury usually arises contemporaneously with the wrongful act causing the injury. |
|
Ude v. Ude
2009 ND 211
Highlight: The district court may extend an existing protection order after the petitioner shows there has been actual or imminent domestic violence prior to the extension. |
|
State v. Grant
2009 ND 210
Highlight: In a sexual assault case, statements reasonably pertinent to the medical diagnosis and treatment of physical and psychological trauma are admissible under N.D.R.Ev. 803(4). |