Opinions

Disciplinary Board v. Light 2007 ND 170
Docket No.: 20070327
Filing Date: 11/14/2007
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Original Proceeding
Author:

Highlight: Interim suspension of lawyer ordered.

Rodenbiker v. Workforce Safety and Insurance 2007 ND 169
Docket No.: 20070114
Filing Date: 10/29/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Administrative Proceeding
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Section 65-05-10, N.D.C.C., does not provide for an award of partial disability benefits when an injured worker cannot be returned to substantial gainful employment as defined under N.D.C.C. 65-05.1-01(3), and does not have a retained earnings capacity to meet the income test of N.D.C.C. 65-05.1-01(6)(a)(3).
The purpose of partial disability benefits is to assist individuals who can be returned to substantial gainful employment through rehabilitation, but will experience a decrease in earnings capacity upon return to the workforce.
Partial disability benefits are for individuals who can return to substantial gainful employment, but at a lesser amount of income.

Bertsch v. Bertsch 2007 ND 168
Docket No.: 20070110
Filing Date: 10/19/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: The law of the case doctrine applies only to issues decided by final judgments.
A district court has broad discretion regarding the scope of discovery.
A district court discovery order must be obeyed by the party to whom the order was issued. Failure to obey the order will result in a sanction, requiring the failing party to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, caused by the failure, unless the court finds that the failure was substantially justified.

Kienzle v. Yantzer 2007 ND 167
Docket No.: 20060364
Filing Date: 10/19/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: When a stipulation is incorporated into a judgment, the judgment is interpreted and enforced, not the underlying contract.
A district court's interpretation of its own judgment is entitled to deference when the language of the judgment is ambiguous.
A district court's decision whether to allow a custodial parent to relocate out of state with the child is a finding of fact, and will not be overturned on appeal unless clearly erroneous.

Interest of T. E. (Confidential) 2007 ND 166
Docket No.: 20070278
Filing Date: 10/16/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Mental Health
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A State Hospital patient can be subject to more than one 90-day forced medication order.
The refusal-of-medication requirement of N.D.C.C. § 25-03.1-18.1(1)(a)(2) can be met when a patient who is not literally refusing medication but is taking medication only because of a prior forced medication order indicates he would not take further medication unless ordered to do so by a court.

Sayler v. ND Dept. of Transportation 2007 ND 165
Docket No.: 20070101
Filing Date: 10/16/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: When an administrative order revoking a driver's license is appealed to the district court, the director or the hearing officer who rendered the decision must file a certified transcript of the testimony and all other proceedings within twenty days after receipt of the notice of appeal.
Probable cause to arrest a driver for driving under the influence exists if the police officer (1) observes some signs of physical or mental impairment, and (2) has reason to believe the driver's impairment is caused by alcohol.

State v. Barendt 2007 ND 164
Docket No.: 20060370
Filing Date: 10/16/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A fact-finder decides the credibility of witnesses, and is not required to believe a witness's testimony, even when no direct evidence is offered to the contrary.

Ritter, Laber & Assoc., et al. v. Koch Oil, et al. (Cross w/20000224 & 20030347) 2007 ND 163
Docket No.: 20070029
Filing Date: 10/16/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A party seeking reformation of a written agreement must prove by clear and convincing evidence the document does not fully or truly state the agreement the parties intended to make.
The party seeking reformation of an agreement on the basis of mutual mistake must show that, when the agreement was executed, both parties intended to say something different from what was said in the document.
In a class action lawsuit, the district court may award payment to the class representatives. Factors in making the decision include the risk to class representatives in bringing suit, the time and effort spent by the class representatives, the duration of the litigation, the time and effort expended by the representatives in pursuing the litigation, and the degree to which the class has benefitted from the representatives' actions.
The districtr court must consider the factors listed under N.D.R.Civ.P. 23(p)(5) in awarding attorney fees in a class action lawsuit.
The district court is considered an expert in determining an award of attorney fees, and its decision will not be overturned on appeal absent a clear abuse of discretion.
In awarding attorney fees in a class action lawsuit, the court may consider not only the available settlement fund but also the amount of actual claims on the fund.

State v. Fasteen 2007 ND 162
Docket No.: 20070046
Filing Date: 10/16/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: Under the Terry doctrine, a law enforcement officer can make an investigative stop of a vehicle if the officer has a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the motorist has violated or is violating the law.
Under N.D.C.C. 39-10-38(1), no person may turn a vehicle right or left upon a roadway without giving an appropriate signal and unless or until such movement can be made with reasonable safety.

State v. Hemmes (consolidated w/20070011) 2007 ND 161
Docket No.: 20070010
Filing Date: 10/16/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) does not apply to probation revocation proceedings.
The evidentiary disclosure requirements of N.D.R.Crim.P. 16 apply to probation revocation proceedings.