Opinions

State v. Johnson (consolidated w/20080022) 2008 ND 168
Docket No.: 20080021
Filing Date: 9/23/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author:

Highlight: Criminal judgments for contact by bodily fluids with a law enforcement officer and a person lawfully present in a correctional facility who is not an inmate are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Ongstad, et al. v. Piper Jaffray & Co. 2008 ND 167
Docket No.: 20070260
Filing Date: 9/8/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A party seeking to invoke application of federal preemption under the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act ("SLUSA") must show that (1) the action is a "covered class action" under the Act; (2) the action purports to be based upon state law; (3) the action alleges the defendant misrepresented or omitted a material fact, or used or employed a manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance; and (4) the action alleges the defendant's misrepresentations, omissions, manipulations, or deceptions were made in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security.
In determining whether a class action is barred under SLUSA, courts look to the actual nature of the conduct alleged, and plaintiffs may not avoid SLUSA's preemptive effect by creative or artful pleading.
SLUSA's preemptive reach must be broadly construed, and is coextensive with federal regulatory authority over securities fraud under Section 10b and Rule 10b-5.
When a broker purchases or sells securities on a client's behalf without authorization, the unauthorized transaction may constitute securities fraud.

Von Ruden v. ND Workforce Safety and Insurance 2008 ND 166
Docket No.: 20070367
Filing Date: 9/8/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Administrative Proceeding
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A court reviewing an administrative appeal may not consider additional evidence not contained in the administrative record filed with the court.
Waiver is a voluntary and intentional relinquishment of a known advantage, benefit, claim, privilege, or right, and may be established by express agreement or may be inferred from a party's acts or conduct.

Doeden v. Stubstad 2008 ND 165
Docket No.: 20070322
Filing Date: 9/4/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A gift is a transfer of personal property voluntarily made without consideration and need not be in writing.
A valid gift requires an intention by the donor to give property to the donee, coupled with an actual or constructive delivery of the property to the donee and acceptance of the property by the donee.
If a written contract is ambiguous, extrinsic evidence may be considered to determine the parties' intent, and the terms of the contract and the parties' intent are questions of fact.

Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. v. Thies, et al. 2008 ND 164
Docket No.: 20080017
Filing Date: 9/4/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Insurance
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: An insurance contract is construed to give effect to the mutual intention of the parties as it existed at the time of contracting.
Courts look first to the language of an insurance contract, and if the policy language is clear on its face, there is no room for construction.
A third-party liability insurance policy provides coverage for the insured's liability to another in which the insurer assumes a contractual duty to pay judgments recovered against the insured arising from the insured's negligence, while a first-party property insurance policy provides coverage for loss or damage sustained by the insured in which the insurer promises to provide coverage to the insured upon the happening of the risk insured against.

Coughlin Construction v. Nu-Tec Industries, et al. 2008 ND 163
Docket No.: 20070311
Filing Date: 9/4/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Objections to damages must be raised in the district court to preserve those issues for appellate review.
Whether a party has made a good-faith effort to mitigate damages is a finding of fact that will be set aside on appeal only if it is clearly erroneous.
Although the officers and directors of a corporation generally are not liable for the ordinary debts of a corporation, the corporate veil may be pierced when the legal entity is used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud, or defend crime.

Disciplinary Board v. McCray (Consolidated w/ 20070377) 2008 ND 162
Docket No.: 20070376
Filing Date: 9/3/2008
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Original Proceeding
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Lawyer suspended from practice of law for six months and one day and ordered to pay costs and expenses of proceeding for violating N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.5, 4.1, 5.4, 5.5(e), 7.3(a), 8.4(c), (f), and (g), and N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl. 1.2A(3) and (8).
Improper solicitation of clients occurs when a lawyer involves himself with an organization that independently targets and solicits prospects for his representation.

Sanders v. Gravel Products, Inc. 2008 ND 161
Docket No.: 20080001
Filing Date: 9/2/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: A person may waive contractual rights and privileges to which that person is legally entitled.
A claim that ERISA was violated because an employer failed to properly fund a retirement plan is within the concurrent jurisdiction of a state court.
A contract between one employee and an employer can be an employee benefit plan subject to ERISA.
The existence of an ERISA plan is a mixed question of fact and law.

Lucas v. Porter, et al. 2008 ND 160
Docket No.: 20070169
Filing Date: 8/28/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: The rule against splitting a cause of action is part of a rule of abatement and part of a rule of res judicata.
A pending action may be pleaded as a bar to a subsequent action where a final judgment in the prior action, pleaded in abatement, would support a plea of res judicata on the issues involved in the second action.
Claim preclusion prevents the relitigation of claims that were raised or could have been raised in prior actions between the same parties or their privies and means a valid existing final judgment from a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive with regard to claims raised, or those that could have been raised and determined, as to the parties and their privies in all other actions.
Claim preclusion applies even if subsequent claims are based upon a different legal theory.
For proposes of claim preclusion, privity exists if a person is so identified in interest with another that the person represents the same legal right.

Gustafson v. Poitra, et al. 2008 ND 159
Docket No.: 20070301
Filing Date: 8/28/2008
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Foreclosure
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: Generally, a statute of limitations is an affirmative defense that is waived if not pleaded.
Failure to file a brief by the adverse party may be deemed an admission that, in the opinion of party or counsel, the motion is meritorious. Even if an answer brief is not filed, the moving party must still demonstrate to the court that it is entitled to the relief requested.
In responding to a summary judgment motion, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of the adverse party's pleading, but the adverse party's response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If the adverse party does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, must be entered against the adverse party.
Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59, the district court in its sound discretion may vacate a decision and grant a new trial if there is newly discovered material evidence that the party could not have discovered and produced at the trial with reasonable diligence.