Opinions

Doyle v. Sprynczynatyk 2001 ND 8
Docket No.: 20000244
Filing Date: 1/30/2001
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: Points on a driving record must be reduced for completion of a defensive driver course only if the points are accumulated prior to completing the course. Points accumulate when entered on the driving record, not at the date of the traffic citation or conviction.

Disciplinary Board v. Howe 2001 ND 7
Docket No.: 20000211
Filing Date: 1/30/2001
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Original Proceeding
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A lawyer's conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation generally results in suspension from the practice of law.

Reiser v. Reiser 2001 ND 6
Docket No.: 20000194
Filing Date: 1/30/2001
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: In dividing the marital estate, fault causing deterioration of the marriage is a relevant factor under the Ruff-Fischer guidelines.
In awarding attorney fees in a divorce proceeding, fault is only relevant to the extent one party has unreasonably escalated the fees.

State v. Kelly 2001 ND 5
Docket No.: 20000154
Filing Date: 1/30/2001
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Judgment of conviction for gross sexual imposition, attempted gross sexual imposition, felonious restraint, and theft summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Marschner v. Marschner 2001 ND 4
Docket No.: 20000172
Filing Date: 1/30/2001
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A spouse is disadvantaged who has foregone opportunities or lost advantages as a consequence of the marriage and who has contributed during the marriage to the supporting spouse's increased earning capacity. A disadvantaged spouse is not required to deplete a property distribution in order to live.
A valid consideration in awarding spousal support is balancing the burden created by divorce. A trial court cannot consider issues of property division and spousal support separately, in a vacuum, but must examine those issues together.

City of Fargo v. Salsman 2001 ND 3
Docket No.: 20000205
Filing Date: 1/30/2001
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Violation of City Ordinance
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The trial court's judgment of conviction for a violation of Fargo Municipal Code is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Englund v. State (Consolidated w/20000251 through 20000254) 2001 ND 2
Docket No.: 20000250
Filing Date: 1/30/2001
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Appeal from denial of post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Petition for Change of Designation of Judgeship No. 1 2001 ND 1
Docket No.: 20000362
Filing Date: 1/3/2001
Case Type: Judicial Administration - Rule - Rule
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Petition to move chambers of Judgeship No. 1 in the Southwest Judicial District from Dickinson to Bowman denied.

Estate of Lutz (Cross-Ref. w/960177 & 980390) 2000 ND 226
Docket No.: 20000098
Filing Date: 12/29/2000
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Neumann, William

Highlight: Whether services performed by a family member are so exceptional and extraordinary as to imply a contract to pay for those services is a question of fact.
Lack of legal advice to a prospective spouse to obtain independent counsel is a significant factor in weighing the voluntariness of a premarital agreement, but the presence of independent counsel is not a prerequisite to enforceability.
Separate statutes under the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act govern unconscionability at the time the agreement was executed, unconscionability at the time of separation or marital dissolution, and unconscionability that may result from enforcement at any time, including the time of death.
A spouse can waive any right of inheritance and succession in a valid and enforceable premarital agreement and consent to will.
Attorney fees are not allowed to a successful litigant unless expressly authorized by statute or agreement.

Jacobson v. ND Workers Comp. Bureau 2000 ND 225
Docket No.: 20000102
Filing Date: 12/29/2000
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: A willful false claim or false statement is sufficiently material for forfeiture of future benefits if it is a statement which could have misled the Bureau in a determination of the claim.
Before terminating a claimant's disability benefits, due process requires the Bureau to give the claimant pre-termination notice of its intent to terminate benefits, a summary of the evidence, and an opportunity to respond. The post-deprivation hearing must be provided at a meaningful time, as required by the due process clause.