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.
5791 - 5800 of 12279 results
|
Koapke v. Herfendal, et al.
2003 ND 64
Highlight: A referring physician does not have a duty to obtain a patient's informed consent unless the referring physician formally prescribed or performed the procedure. |
|
Bachmeier v. Workers Comp. et al.
2003 ND 63
Highlight: A claimant who files a reapplication seeking a resumption of discontinued disability benefits must prove an actual wage loss caused by a significant change in the compensable medical condition. |
|
Henry v. Securities Commissioner (Consolidated w/20020156 & 20020157)
2003 ND 62 Highlight: An order of the Securities Commissioner denying a motion to dismiss a cease and desist order is not a final order under the Administrative Agencies Practice Act and is not appealable. |
|
Lanners, et al. v. Johnson, et al.
2003 ND 61 Highlight: When a plaintiff presents a prima facie case for child custody modification, an evidentiary hearing must be held. |
|
Lesmeister v. ND Workers Comp., et al.
2003 ND 60 |
|
Argabright v. Rodgers, et al.
2003 ND 59
Highlight: An ostensible agency rests upon conduct or communications of the principal which, reasonably interpreted, causes a third person to believe the agent has authority to act for and on behalf of the principal. |
|
Cannaday v. Cannaday
2003 ND 58
Highlight: The rules for the division of property are the same in a separation action as in a divorce action, and the division must be an equitable one. |
|
City of Bismarck v. Stockert (Consolidated w/20020332 & 20020333)
2003 ND 57 Highlight: Conviction for criminal mischief, disorderly conduct, and unlawful registration of a motor vehicle is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
City of Devils Lake v. Alford
2003 ND 56 Highlight: Denial of a motion to suppress evidence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Schmidt v. Schmidt
2003 ND 55
Highlight: A trial court determining the best interest and welfare of a child in making a custody decision may appropriately consider such things as the child's interaction and interrelationships with a party's extended family and other people, such as childcare providers and others who may significantly affect the child's best interests. |