Opinions

State v. Mayer 2008 ND 120
Docket No.: 20080046
Filing Date: 6/26/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Conviction for possessing marijuana, methamphetamine, and drug paraphernalia is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).

State v. Schmeets (Consolidated w/20070361) 2008 ND 119
Docket No.: 20070360
Filing Date: 6/26/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Order revoking probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4), and remanded to correct clerical errors.

Riemers, et al. v. State, et al. 2008 ND 118
Docket No.: 20070307
Filing Date: 6/26/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author:

Highlight: A district court judgment awarding attorney fees for a prior appeal is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Red River Wings, Inc. v. Hoot, Inc. (Consolidated w/20070088 & 20070089) 2008 ND 117
Docket No.: 20070087
Filing Date: 6/20/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: Unambiguous contracts are particularly amenable to summary judgment.
Limited partners who participate in the business of the partnership or act in concert with the general partner are subject to the fiduciary duties of good faith, fair dealing, loyalty, and care applicable to partners in a general partnership.
Whether a person has breached a fiduciary duty is a question of fact.
Majority limited partners who control or act in concert with the general partner can be held personally liable to minority limited partners for damages for breach of fiduciary duties.
In the breach of a partnership contract by wrongful dissolution, the damages recoverable include the value of the profits the plaintiff otherwise would have received had the partnership not been wrongfully dissolved.
District courts are considered experts in determining what is a reasonable amount of attorney fees, and an award will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.
Whether interference with a contractual relationship is justified is a question of fact.
The doctrines of frustration of purpose and impossibility do not apply if the frustration or impossibility is caused by a party to the contract.
When an agreement does not specify an interest rate, the rate for prejudgment interest is 6 percent from the time the right to recover vested.

Baukol Builders v. County of Grand Forks 2008 ND 116
Docket No.: 20060120
Filing Date: 6/9/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A party cannot seek the benefits of a transaction under the law and thereafter challenge the validity of the transaction.
A governing body has some discretion to award a public improvement construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder.
In assessing the lowest responsible bidder, a governing body may consider the prospective bidder's ability, capacity, reputation, experience, and efficiency.
Absent statutory or contractual authority, each party to a lawsuit bears its own attorney fees.

Peterson v. Ziegler 2008 ND 115
Docket No.: 20070275
Filing Date: 6/9/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Generally, the time computation rules in N.D.R.Civ.P. 6 apply to an appeal from an administrative agency decision unless the provisions of the rule conflict with a governing statute.
A driver is not harmed by a law enforcement officer's failure to give the implied consent advisory before the driver consents to a chemical test.

Burlington Northern v. Fail, et al. 2008 ND 114
Docket No.: 20070212
Filing Date: 6/9/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: The area of land covered by the easement, servitude, or nonappurtenant restriction on the use of real property shall be properly described and shall set out the area of land covered by the interest in real property.
A reservation must be clearly expressed in a deed and described with enough certainty so it can be identified as to its location.

Olson v. State 2008 ND 113
Docket No.: 20070071
Filing Date: 6/5/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A petitioner seeking post-conviction relief through DNA testing of evidence must present a prima facie case showing the evidence to be tested has been subject to a sufficient chain of custody.
To establish a prima facie case, the petitioner must present testimony or otherwise show that evidence still exists and has not been substituted, tampered with, replaced, or altered in any material respect.

Overboe v. Brodshaug 2008 ND 112
Docket No.: 20070263
Filing Date: 6/5/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A motion to vacate a default judgment is addressed to the sound discretion of the district court.
A statute of limitation does not defeat defensive recoupment, which must arise out of the same transaction that is the subject matter of the plaintiff's action and can only be used to reduce or avoid the plaintiff's recovery.
Interest before maturity is compensation for the use of money and is regulated by usury statutes, while interest allowed after maturity is considered compensation for damages for the wrongful detention of money and is not regulated by the usury statutes.

Lawrence v. Delkamp 2008 ND 111
Docket No.: 20070131
Filing Date: 6/5/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Rule 43(a), N.D.R.Civ.P., permits, and does not mandate, courts to allow presentation of testimony by contemporaneous transmission.
The admissibility of telephonic testimony is conditioned on good cause in compelling and unexpected circumstances and the availability of appropriate safeguards.
It is within the district court's discretion to deny a party's request to allow telephonic testimony in the absence of appropriate safeguards, and it is within the district court's discretion to determine that having someone onsite to administer an oath or affirmation is an appropriate safeguard required for the admissibility of telephonic testimony.