Search Tips

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.

5081 - 5090 of 12382 results

State v. Just 2006 ND 225
Docket No.: 20060146
Filing Date: 11/7/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: An information or complaint must contain a plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts and elements of the offense.
The omission of statutory language from an information or complaint may be harmless if the defendant was not substantially prejudiced and the document is sufficiently specific to enable the defendant to prepare a defense.

Riemers v. City of Grand Forks 2006 ND 224
Docket No.: 20060057
Filing Date: 11/7/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A party opposing summary judgment may not merely rely upon the pleadings or unsupported, conclusory allegations.
A party waives an issue by not providing supporting arguments, reasoning, or citations to relevant legal authority.
An Attorney General's opinion is "highly persuasive" if it is consistent with the district court's independent analysis of the issues presented.
Under the open records law, a public entity need not disclose a record that is not in its possession or custody at the time of the request.
The "criminal intelligence and investigative information exception," which exempts active criminal investigation material from disclosure under the open records law, is temporary in nature and terminates upon the completion of the criminal prosecution.

Sambursky v. State (Consol. w/20050331-20050335) 2006 ND 223
Docket No.: 20050330
Filing Date: 11/7/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A district court may summarily dismiss an application for post-conviction relief if there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
If the petitioner raises an issue of material fact in resisting summary dismissal of an application for post-conviction relief, the petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the matter.
In a post-conviction relief proceeding alleging the ineffective assistance of counsel with respect to a guilty plea, counsel is ineffective if a claimant can show that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, the petitioner would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.

State v. Davis 2006 ND 222
Docket No.: 20060033
Filing Date: 11/7/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Convictions for carrying a concealed firearm and possessing a short-barreled shotgun are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Rojas v. Workforce Safety and Ins., et al. (Cross-ref. w/20040352) 2006 ND 221
Docket No.: 20060087
Filing Date: 10/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: An injured employee is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney's fees when Workforce Safety and Insurance acts without substantial justification in reducing or denying the employee's benefits.

Hasper v. Center Mutual Ins. Co. 2006 ND 220
Docket No.: 20050316
Filing Date: 10/23/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Insurance
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: An insurer which seeks to deny underinsured motorist coverage based upon the insured's failure to notify the insurer of a proposed settlement with the tortfeasor must demonstrate that it suffered actual prejudice resulting from the lack of notice.
The determination whether an insurer has been prejudiced by an unauthorized settlement is a question of fact that is generally inappropriate for summary judgment.
In determining whether an insurer has suffered actual prejudice from an unauthorized settlement, relevant factors include the amount of the tortfeasor's assets, the likelihood of recovery via subrogation, the extent of the insured's damages, and the expenses and risks of litigating the insured's cause of action.

Guardianship/Conservatorship of Thomas 2006 ND 219
Docket No.: 20050370
Filing Date: 10/20/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Guardian/Conservator
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: The Supreme Court applies the abuse of discretion standard when reviewing a trial court's selection of a guardian and conservator.
Concern over the appearance of undue influence can establish "good cause," justifying the appointment of a neutral and detached person as guardian and conservator over others with higher priority who have a financial interest in the protected person's assets.
The Supreme Court applies the abuse of discretion standard of review to the district court's ultimate decision whether to approve payment of a claim against a protected person's estate and the clearly erroneous standard of review to the court's underlying findings of fact.

Interest of B.L.S. (Confidential) 2006 ND 218
Docket No.: 20060234
Filing Date: 10/20/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Mental Health
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: After a request to treat with medication has been made, an independent physician or psychiatrist must certify that the proposed treatment is clinically appropriate and necessary, that the patient was offered the treatment and refused it, that the prescribed medication is the least restrictive form necessary to meet the patient's needs, and that the benefits of treatment outweigh the known risks.
Mental health respondents are entitled to adequate notice and the opportunity to prepare to address the involuntary treatment with medication.
A district court cannot order medications which have not been noticed in the request to treat with medication and have not been certified as clinically appropriate and necessary by a second physician or psychiatrist.
The involuntary treatment with medication is not limited to psychotropic medications used to treat mental illness.

Hild, et al. v. Johnson, et al. 2006 ND 217
Docket No.: 20060056
Filing Date: 10/20/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: An undivided mineral interest conveyed or reserved in a deed may be expressed as a percentage, as a fraction, or as a specified number of mineral acres.
A grantee of a specified number of mineral acres in a described tract of land acquires that number of acres, and does not gain or lose if the tract contains more or less acreage than contemplated by the parties.
A grantee of an undivided mineral interest expressed as a percentage or fraction acquires that quantum in the entire described tract of land, and may gain or lose if the tract contains more or less acreage than contemplated by the parties.
When there is a discrepancy in a deed between the specific description of the property conveyed and an expression of the quantity conveyed, the specific description is controlling.
Quantity is the least certain of all elements of description in a deed, and all other elements of description must be ambiguous and uncertain before a recital of quantity will be considered.

Rummer v. State (Cross-reference w/19950324) 2006 ND 216
Docket No.: 20050341
Filing Date: 10/17/2006
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: The petitioner has the burden of establishing grounds for post-conviction relief.
In order to prevail on a post-conviction claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, the petitioner has the heavy burden of proving: (1) counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the defendant was prejudiced by counsel's deficient performance.
To establish a Brady violation, the defendant must prove: (1) the government possessed evidence favorable to the defendant; (2) the defendant did not possess the evidence and could not have obtained it with reasonable diligence; (3) the prosecution suppressed the evidence; and (4) a reasonable probability exists that the outcome of the proceedings would have been different if the evidence had been disclosed.
A foreign-national criminal defendant may waive any right to consular notification by failing to timely raise the issue.

Page 509 of 1239