Opinions

Estate of Howser 2002 ND 33
Docket No.: 20010185
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Whether undue influence exists is a question of fact.
A trial court may remove the personal representative of an estate for cause.

Bertsch, et al. v. Duemeland, et al. (cross-ref. w/20040055) 2002 ND 32
Docket No.: 20010151
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Whether a communication that is capable of a defamatory meaning is understood by the recipient as defamatory is ordinarily a question of fact.
To recover for interference with a business relationship, a plaintiff must show he would have obtained some economic benefit in the absence of the interference.

City of Devils Lake v. Lawrence 2002 ND 31
Docket No.: 20010063
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: An officer's reasonable and articulable suspicion that an individual has committed the offense of disorderly conduct is sufficient to justify a temporary detention of that individual for investigative purposes.

Olson v. Olson 2002 ND 30
Docket No.: 20010156
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Maring, Mary

Knutson v. Knutson 2002 ND 29
Docket No.: 20010238
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: In considering whether a settlement agreement between divorcing parties should be enforced, the trial court should inquire: (1) whether the agreement is free from mistake, duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence; and (2) whether the agreement is unconscionable.
In the context of improperly coercing a spouse to sign a settlement agreement, undue influence is the improper use of power or trust in a way that deprives a person of free will and substitutes another's objective.
When the child support guidelines do not address a situation, as in the case of parents having joint physical custody of a child for equal amounts of time, the trial court must enter an order appropriate to the needs of the child and the ability of the parent to pay.

Hughes v. State, et al. (Con. w/20010189 & 20010190) 2002 ND 28
Docket No.: 20010188
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Issues raised in the district court but not briefed on appeal are waived.
A trial 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.
No appeal lies from a final order in a habeas corpus proceeding.

Red Paint v. State 2002 ND 27
Docket No.: 20010245
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A post-conviction relief claim of disclosure of privileged communications is barred by res judicata if it was fully and finally determined in a previous proceeding.
A holder of a privilege waives the right to assert the privilege if he voluntarily discloses any significant portion of the privileged matter.
It is misuse of process to fail to raise an issue on direct appeal which is appropriate for review on direct appeal.

City of Fargo v. Steffan (Consolidated w/20010176) 2002 ND 26
Docket No.: 20010175
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: The arrest of a person in a public place for a public offense committed in the officer's presence is neither a violation of the United States' nor North Dakota's Constitution.
Under the search and seizure jurisprudence of both the United States Supreme Court and the North Dakota Supreme Court, an open doorway is a public place.

Grosinger v. M.B.K. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2002 ND 25
Docket No.: 20010108
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: The phrase "likely to engage in further acts of sexually predatory conduct," used for commitment of sexually dangerous persons, means the person's propensity towards sexual violence is of such a degree as to pose a threat to others.

State v. Roberson 2002 ND 24
Docket No.: 20010053
Filing Date: 2/20/2002
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: While a defendant's disruptive conduct in court may, in some instances, be sufficient grounds to require a competency hearing, not all disruptive defendants are incompetent to stand trial. Rather, the conduct may be contempt of court.