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.
5101 - 5200 of 12418 results
Eifert v. Eifert
2006 ND 240 Highlight: In deciding custody, a district court may consider the child's interaction and interrelationships with a party's extended family and others who may significantly affect the child's best interests. |
State v. Doohen
2006 ND 239
Highlight: A warrantless search is unreasonable unless it falls within a recognized exception to the warrant requirement. |
Glasser v. Glasser
2006 ND 238
Highlight: An order dismissing an order to show cause why a party should not be held in contempt of court is appealable. |
Genter v. Workforce Safety & Ins. Fund, et al.
2006 ND 237
Highlight: Workforce Safety and Insurance must determine whether a medical assessment team is required in a particular case based on the nature of the claimed injury. |
Klein v. Larson
2006 ND 236
Highlight: In an initial custody decision, the trial court must award custody to the parent who will better promote the best interests and welfare of the child. |
Silbernagel, et al. v. Silbernagel, et al.
2006 ND 235 Highlight: Summary judgment in a quiet title action is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
State v. Morrell
2006 ND 234 Highlight: A criminal judgment entered upon a conditional guilty plea to the offense of carrying a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
Otto v. State (Cross-Ref. w/20030368)
2006 ND 233 Highlight: Denial of post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
Wishek v. Kaseman
2006 ND 232 Highlight: A judgment granting summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
Trinity Hospitals v. Mattson, et al.
2006 ND 231
Highlight: The Supreme Court's authority to issue a supervisory writ is a discretionary power exercised rarely, cautiously, and only in extraordinary cases to rectify errors and to prevent injustice when no adequate alternative remedy exists. |
Disciplinary Board v. Aakre
2006 ND 230 Highlight: Suspension of lawyer ordered. |
Tverberg v. Workforce Safety & Insurance, et al.
2006 ND 229
Highlight: The rehabilitation provisions of workers compensation law are intended to return injured workers to substantial gainful employment with a minium of retraining as soon as possible after a work injury, but those provisions do not require complete rehabilitation to preinjury earning capacity. |
Disciplinary Board v. Bullis
2006 ND 228
Highlight: Attorney suspended from practice of law for 90 days, ordered to complete six hours of non-self-study continuing legal education courses on conflicts of interest within the next two years in addition to the mandatory CLE requirements, and ordered to pay costs and expenses of proceedings. |
State v. Buchholz (Consol. w/20060061) (Cross-ref. w/20040118)
2006 ND 227
Highlight: A mistake of law defense generally is not an available defense for strict liability offenses. |
Unterseher v. Ziegler
2006 ND 226 Highlight: Suspension of driving privileges is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
State v. Just
2006 ND 225
Highlight: An information or complaint must contain a plain, concise, and definite written statement of the essential facts and elements of the offense. |
Riemers v. City of Grand Forks
2006 ND 224
Highlight: A party opposing summary judgment may not merely rely upon the pleadings or unsupported, conclusory allegations. |
Sambursky v. State (Consol. w/20050331-20050335)
2006 ND 223
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. |
State v. Davis
2006 ND 222 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 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
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. |
Guardianship/Conservatorship of Thomas
2006 ND 219
Highlight: The Supreme Court applies the abuse of discretion standard when reviewing a trial court's selection of a guardian and conservator. |
Interest of B.L.S. (Confidential)
2006 ND 218
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. |
Hild, et al. v. Johnson, et al.
2006 ND 217
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. |
Rummer v. State (Cross-reference w/19950324)
2006 ND 216
Highlight: The petitioner has the burden of establishing grounds for post-conviction relief. |
Livinggood v. Balsdon
2006 ND 215
Highlight: On remand, a district court may, unless otherwise specified, make its decision on the basis of the evidence already before it or may take additional evidence. The decision on taking additional evidence will be reversed only if the district court abuses its discretion. |
Eichhorn v. The Waldo Township Bd. of Supervisors, et al.
2006 ND 214
Highlight: Intervention is appropriate when the intervenor claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and that the disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the intervenor's ability to protect that interest, unless the interest is adequately represented by existing parties. |
Witzke v. Gonzales
2006 ND 213
Highlight: A civil action is commenced by the service of a summons. |
State v. Ebel (Consolidated w/20050441-20050443)
2006 ND 212
Highlight: The Court looks at the "totality of the circumstances" on appeal, giving deference to the district court's findings, to determine whether a search warrant was supported by probable cause. |
State v. Sevigny
2006 ND 211
Highlight: Evidence of an alibi defense may be excluded if a defendant fails to give sufficient notice of his intent to present evidence of an alibi. |
Interest of T.A., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2006 ND 210
Highlight: To terminate parental rights, the petitioner must prove three elements by clear and convincing evidence: (1) the child is a deprived child, (2) the conditions and causes of the deprivation are likely to continue or will not be remedied, and (3) that by reason thereof the child is suffering or will probably suffer serious physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm. |
State v. Odom
2006 ND 209
Highlight: Warrantless searches are unreasonable unless they fall within a recognized exception to the warrant requirement. Consent is an exception to the warrant requirement. The scope of an individual's consent is determined by considering what an objectively reasonable person would have understood the consent to include. The scope of a search is generally defined by its expressed object. |
Forbes v. Workforce Safety & Ins., et al.
2006 ND 208
Highlight: In an administrative appeal, the Court determines only whether a reasoning mind reasonably could have determined that the factual conclusions reached were proved by the weight of the evidence from the entire record. |
City of Bismarck v. Perusquia
2006 ND 207 Highlight: A conviction for driving under the influence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
Jangula v. Jangula (Cross-Ref. w/20050070)
2006 ND 206 Highlight: A district court's property division in a divorce is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
City of Jamestown v. Rethemeier (Consolidated w/20060100)
2006 ND 205 Highlight: Denial of motion to suppress and judgment of conviction is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
Lee v. Buehner, et al.
2006 ND 204 Highlight: A judgment awarding damages in a personal injury action is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
Ernst v. State
2006 ND 203 Highlight: Denial of application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (6), and (7). |
Thurn v. Workforce Safety and Insurance, et al.
2006 ND 202 Highlight: An order of Workforce Safety and Insurance denying workers compensation benefits is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
State v. DeGroot
2006 ND 201 Highlight: Conviction of theft of property summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
State v. Jackson (cross-ref. w/940199)
2006 ND 200 Highlight: Conviction of driving under suspension summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). |
Interest of K.S., et al. (Consolidated w/20050398) CONFIDENTIAL
2006 ND 199 Highlight: Order terminating parental rights summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
Sandberg v. American Family Ins.
2006 ND 198
Highlight: The requirements of a statute may become part of an insurance policy. |
Stenvold v. Workforce Safety & Insurance, et al.
2006 ND 197
Highlight: An administrative agency generally may not consider evidence which has not been offered, admitted, and made a part of the official record of the administrative proceeding. |
State v. Graf (Consolidated w/20050411-20050417)
2006 ND 196
Highlight: Warrantless searches inside an individual's home are presumptively unreasonable, but searches inside an individual's home are not unreasonable if the search falls under one of the well-delineated exceptions to the warrant requirement. |
Industrial Commission v. Noack
2006 ND 195
Highlight: An appellant has the duty to provide a transcript sufficient to allow a meaningful and intelligent review of the alleged errors. |
Ellis v. Disciplinary Board
2006 ND 194
Highlight: Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, including reinstatement proceedings, are reviewed de novo on the record. |
State v. Iverson
2006 ND 193 Highlight: A statute authorizing credit for time served in custody cannot be retroactively applied after a person has been finally convicted. |
State v. Schmidkunz
2006 ND 192
Highlight: In controlling the scope of closing argument, the district court is vested with discretion, and absent a clear showing of an abuse of discretion, we will not reverse on grounds the prosecutor exceeded the scope of permissible closing argument. Unless the error is fundamental, a defendant must demonstrate a prosecutor's comments during closing argument were improper and prejudicial. |
Leet, et al. v. City of Minot
2006 ND 191
Highlight: For recreational use immunity statutes to apply, a person's presence on the landowner's property open for public recreation must be for "recreational purposes," which includes any activity engaged in for the purpose of exercise, relaxation, pleasure, or education. |
Strand, et al. v. Cass County, et al.
2006 ND 190
Highlight: Jury instructions are reviewed to determine whether, as a whole, they fairly and adequately advised the jury of the applicable law. |
Tibert, et al. v. City of Minto
2006 ND 189 Highlight: A decision of a local governing body will be affirmed on appeal unless the local governing body acted arbitrarily, capriciously, or unreasonably, or there is not substantial evidence to support the decision. |
Interest of B.L.S. (Confidential)
2006 ND 188
Highlight: A district court cannot allow a respondent in a mental health proceeding to waive the right to counsel without first establishing, on the record, that the respondent is competent to waive counsel and that the waiver is knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily made. |
ACUITY v. Burd & Smith Construction, Inc., et al.
2006 ND 187 Highlight: A commercial general liability insurance policy excludes coverage for damage to the insured's work product and provides coverage for accidental damage to property other than the insured's work product. |
Jochim v. Jochim
2006 ND 186 |
Ungar v. ND State University
2006 ND 185
Highlight: Res judicata, or 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 resulting final judgment from a court of competent jurisdiction. Collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, forecloses relitigation of issues of either fact or law in a second action based on a different claim, which were necessarily litigated, or must have been litigated, and decided in the prior action. |
State v. Dailey
2006 ND 184 Highlight: After a jury's verdict has been announced, a trial judge may explain to a jury what will occur after the trial has ended. |
Peoples State Bk. of Truman v. Molstad Excavating, et al.
2006 ND 183
Highlight: Part of the law of the case doctrine provides that the orderly functioning of the judicial process requires that judges of coordinate jurisdiction honor one another's orders and revisit them only in special circumstances. |
Clark v. Clark
2006 ND 182
Highlight: A district court's decisions to admit expert testimony or deny a continuance will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. |
Hagel v. Hagel
2006 ND 181 Highlight: When a district court provides no indication of the evidentiary and theoretical basis for its decision, the Supreme Court is left to speculate whether factors were properly considered and the law was properly applied, leaving the Court unable to perform its appellate function. |
Mountrail Bethel Home v. Lovdahl, et al.
2006 ND 180 Highlight: A district court must make findings on issues a party raises and presents evidence on. |
State v. Woinarowicz
2006 ND 179
Highlight: The Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause does not apply to the same extent at pretrial suppression hearings as it does at trial. |
Heng v. Rotech Medical Corp., et al.
2006 ND 176
Highlight: Issues cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. |
State ex rel. ND Housing Finance Agency v. Center Mutual Ins. Co.
2006 ND 175
Highlight: An instrument payable to multiple payees non-alternatively may only be negotiated, discharged, or enforced by all of them. |
Hunt v. Banner Health System
2006 ND 174
Highlight: The presence of a clear, conspicuous, and unambiguous disclaimer may act as an "escape hatch" in an employee handbook, virtually undoing other implied promises made in the handbook. |
State v. Bjerklie
2006 ND 173
Highlight: A court's ruling on a motion in limine is reviewed for abuse of discretion. |
Deacon's Development v. Lamb, et al.
2006 ND 172
Highlight: Attorney fees may be recovered if a court finds a party made a frivolous "claim for relief." |
Dvorak v. Dvorak (cross-ref. w/20040222)
2006 ND 171
Highlight: A custodial parent seeking to change the residence of a child to another state has the burden to prove by a preponderance of evidence that the move is in the child's best interest. |
Weinreis, et al. v. Hill, et al.
2006 ND 170
Highlight: A principal is bound by acts of his agent under a merely ostensible authority to those persons only who in good faith and without ordinary negligence have incurred a liability or parted with value upon the faith thereof. |
State v. Salveson (Consolidated w/20060016)
2006 ND 169
Highlight: A trial court is allowed the widest range of discretion in criminal sentencing. |
State v. Campbell (Consolidated w/20050337 & 20050338)
2006 ND 168
Highlight: Under Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), the admission of out-of-court testimonial statements in criminal cases is precluded, unless the witness is unavailable to testify and the accused has had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant. |
The Ramsey Financial Corp. v. Haugland, et al.
2006 ND 167
Highlight: Voluntary acquiescence in a judgment waives the right to appeal. |
Dahl, et al. v. Messmer, et al.
2006 ND 166
Highlight: On appeal, the substantive evidentiary standard of proof is considered when reviewing a motion for summary judgment. |
Frisk v. Frisk
2006 ND 165
Highlight: A domestic violence protection order may be extended upon request made prior to the order's expiration. |
Disciplinary Board v. Balerud
2006 ND 164 Highlight: Lawyer suspension ordered. |
Molitor v. Molitor
2006 ND 163
Highlight: A trial court's custody decision is a finding of fact that will not be set aside on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous. |
Riemers v. State, et al.
2006 ND 162 Highlight: Absent personal jurisdiction, a court is powerless to do anything beyond dismissing a case without prejudice. |
Lautt v. Lautt
2006 ND 161
Highlight: The standard of review for child support determinations depends on the issue appealed: a de novo standard applies to questions of law; a clearly erroneous standard applies to questions of fact; and an abuse of discretion standard applies to discretionary matters. |
Witzke v. City of Bismarck
2006 ND 160
Highlight: A prosecutor is absolutely immune from liability for prosecutorial functions such as the initiation and pursuit of a criminal prosecution, the presentation of the State's case at trial, and other conduct intimately associated with the judicial process. |
SPW Associates v. Anderson, et al.
2006 ND 159
Highlight: Principles of partnership law apply to a joint venture. |
City of Bismarck v. DePriest (Consolidated w/20060071 & 20060072)
2006 ND 158 Highlight: Law enforcement officials may use persons under 21 years of age to attempt to purchase alcoholic beverages to conduct alcohol compliance checks. |
Johnson v. Gehringer (cross-reference w/20010170)
2006 ND 157
Highlight: A district court's finding of contempt will not be overturned unless there is a clear abuse of discretion. |
Interest of K.H. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2006 ND 156
Highlight: A juvenile's right to counsel can be waived even if the minor is of a young age, provided the juvenile is represented by the child's parent, guardian, or custodian. |
Spectrum Care v. Stevick, et al.
2006 ND 155
Highlight: A person is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits if the person is discharged for misconduct. |
Gietzen v. Gabel
2006 ND 153
Highlight: When there is credible evidence of domestic violence, it is the predominate factor in a child custody decision. |
State v. Torkelsen
2006 ND 152 Highlight: The mere presence at or near the scene of a crime, without more, does not give rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. |
Wilson v. Ibarra
2006 ND 151 Highlight: To justify a termination of all visitation, physical or emotional harm resulting from the visitation must be demonstrated in detail. |
State v. Entzi
2006 ND 150 Highlight: Denial of a motion to terminate probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7). |
Guardianship and Conservatorship of Johnson
2006 ND 149 Highlight: An order appointing co-guardians and co-conservators with unlimited authority to make decisions for the ward is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
Disciplinary Board v. Korsmo
2006 ND 148 Highlight: Lawyer suspension ordered. |
Rekkedal v. Feist
2006 ND 147
Highlight: Dismissal of a lawsuit for failure to timely file the complaint requires that the demand to file has been served under N.D.R.Civ.P. 4(d); N.D.R.Civ.P. 5 service of the demand is not sufficient. |
Disciplinary Board v. Aakre
2006 ND 146 Highlight: Interim suspension of lawyer ordered. |
Estate of Sorenson
2006 ND 145
Highlight: No acknowledgment or promise is sufficient evidence of a new or continuing contract to preclude operation of the statute of limitations unless the acknowledgment or promise is contained in a writing signed by the party to be charged. |
State ex rel. Bd. of University and School Lands v. Alexander, et al.
2006 ND 144
Highlight: The parties to a prior foreclosure action and their assigns are bound by a judgment in the prior action under principles of res judicata. |
Interest of J.S. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2006 ND 143
Highlight: Mentally ill persons who require treatment are entitled to the least restrictive treatment that will meet their treatment needs. |
DeMers v. DeMers
2006 ND 142
Highlight: The statutory presumption against awarding custody to the perpetrator of domestic violence applies when the district court finds there is credible evidence of domestic violence and at least one incident of domestic violence resulted in serious bodily injury or involved the use of a dangerous weapon, or there is a pattern of domestic violence within a reasonable proximity to the proceeding. |
Farmers Insurance Exchange, et al. v. Schirado
2006 ND 141
Highlight: A plaintiff may establish the elements of a claim by circumstantial evidence. |
State v. Ehli (Consolidated w/20060042)
2006 ND 140 Highlight: State's appeal of order suppressing evidence will be dismissed as moot when the underlying cases had been dismissed on a motion by the State. |
State v. Hansen
2006 ND 139
Highlight: An appellate court does not render advisory opinions and will dismiss an appeal if the issues have become moot or so academic that no actual controversy is left to be decided. |
State v. Oien
2006 ND 138 Highlight: An individual trespassing is not entitled to the protections of the Fourth Amendment because he does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. |