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.
5801 - 5810 of 12382 results
|
Lamb v. Riemers
2003 ND 148 Highlight: Unless a contract specifically provides otherwise, the seller may retain earnest money only if the buyer breaches the agreement. |
|
Guardianship of Shatzka
2003 ND 147 Highlight: If a guardian is not appointed, the person for whom guardianship was sought may not be required to pay for a court-appointed visitor, lawyer, physician or temporary guardian. |
|
Krank v. Krank
2003 ND 146 Highlight: In making its custody decision, the trial court is not required to make specific findings of fact on each factor under N.D.C.C. 14-09-06.2(1), but the court should consider all relevant factors in making the decision. |
|
Orvedal v. Orvedal
2003 ND 145
Highlight: When the trial judge who enters an original divorce decree clarifies that decree, the court on appeal affords the clarification considerable deference. |
|
Kjolsrud v. MKB Management Corp.
2003 ND 144 Highlight: North Dakota's false advertising law authorizes "any person acting for the interests of itself, its members, or the general public" to bring an action to enjoin violations only if that person satisfies standing requirements. |
|
State v. Ricker
2003 ND 143 Highlight: Denial of a motion to suppress evidence is summarily affirmed under Rule 35.1(a)(2) and (3), N.D.R.App.P. |
|
Deptuch v. Lindberg
2003 ND 142 Highlight: Judgment upon jury verdict in a contract dispute is summarily affirmed under 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Barnes v. Workforce Safety and Insurance
2003 ND 141 Highlight: Nothing in the Rules of Evidence or the statutes governing administrative procedure precludes an employee of an agency from testifying as an expert witness in an administrative proceeding before the agency. |
|
Kautzman v. Kautzman (Cross-Ref w/980004,990328,990386,20000083,&20010296)
2003 ND 140
Highlight: For an effective appeal on any proper issue, the matter must have been raised in the trial court, so the trial court could rule on it, and a failure to object to an irregularity at trial is a waiver of the issue. |
|
Volz v. Peterson
2003 ND 139
Highlight: A party seeking modification of child custody is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if she presents a prima facie case by alleging, with supporting affidavits, sufficient facts which, if uncontradicted, would support a custody modification in her favor. |