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.
5251 - 5260 of 12382 results
Krall v. State (Consol. w/20050212 & 20050213) (cross-ref. 20000004)
2006 ND 51 Highlight: Denial of applications for post-conviction relief and motions for default judgment are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
Arth v. Arth
2006 ND 50 Highlight: Order for dismissal of lawsuit with prejudice is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
State v. Hoverson
2006 ND 49
Highlight: The level of outrageous conduct necessary to prove a due process violation and bar prosecution is quite high and must shock the conscience of the court. |
Fischer, et al. v. Berger, et al.
2006 ND 48
Highlight: A use of land creates an easement by prescription if the use is adverse, continuous and uninterrupted, and for the 20-year period of prescription. |
Interest of F.F., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2006 ND 47 Highlight: A court may terminate parental rights on finding the child (1) is deprived and (2) has been in foster care for at least four hundred fifty of the previous six hundred sixty nights. |
Berge v. Berge
2006 ND 46
Highlight: When a trial court does not clearly state how it calculated the amount of child support, the Supreme Court will reverse and remand for an explanation even if the record contains adequate evidence for the trial court to make a precise finding. |
State v. Bergstrom
2006 ND 45
Highlight: In a civil forfeiture action, the State must show probable cause exists to bring the forfeiture action, and then the claimant must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, the property is not subject to forfeiture. |
State v. Anderson (CONSOLIDATED W/ 20050229)
2006 ND 44
Highlight: Information from an informant may provide the factual basis to establish reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop. |
Causer v. State (cross-ref. w/20030124)
2006 ND 43 Highlight: Denial of application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (7). |
Ward County Farm Bureau, et al. v. Poolman
2006 ND 42 Highlight: A petitioner for a writ of mandamus must first demonstrate a clear legal right to performance of the particular act sought to be compelled by the writ. |