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.
3401 - 3450 of 12382 results
Krueger v. Krueger (Cross-reference w/20070196)
2013 ND 245 Highlight: A party seeking a contempt sanction must clearly and satisfactorily prove the alleged contempt was committed. An inability to comply with an order is a defense to contempt proceedings, but the alleged contemnor has the burden to prove the defense. |
Stensland v. Disciplinary Board
2013 ND 244
Highlight: A suspended lawyer has the burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence the requisite honesty and integrity to be reinstated to the practice of law. |
Rath v. Rath (cross reference w/20130327 & 20130025)
2013 ND 243
Highlight: Technical violations of a court order do not necessarily require a finding of contempt. |
State, et al. v. B.B., et al. (confidential)
2013 ND 242
Highlight: A paternity and support claim can be bifurcated from a related custody action. |
Dahm v. Stark County Board of County Commissioners
2013 ND 241
Highlight: The decision of a board of county commissioners on whether to approve an application for a zoning change and plat approval will be affirmed unless the board acted arbitrarily or unreasonably, or if there is not substantial evidence supporting the decision. |
Bahtiraj v. State
2013 ND 240 Highlight: Without more, the second Strickland prong is not satisfied by a self-serving statement that the petitioner would have insisted on going to trial. Factors to consider when determining the rationality of rejecting a guilty plea and insisting on going to trial include immigration consequences, strength of the case against the petitioner, and rational defenses to the charged crime. |
State v. Otto
2013 ND 239 Highlight: The automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement applies to a readily mobile camper that is not in a place regularly used for residential purposes. |
Kinsella v. State
2013 ND 238 Highlight: Failure to move pretrial to suppress evidence, by itself, does not equate to ineffective assistance of counsel. Where evidence allegedly seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment, but where counsel has no reason to question the search and seizure, failure to file a motion to suppress does not render the representation ineffective. |
Morton County Social Service Board, et al. v. Houim
2013 ND 237
Highlight: When a party moves to modify primary residential responsibility of a child, the district court must consider only the party's motion on briefs, affidavits, and other supporting documents to determine whether the moving party established a prima facie case and is entitled to an evidentiary hearing. |
State v. Canfield
2013 ND 236 Highlight: An inadequate record may make appellate review of the district court's denial of a suppression motion impossible, thus requiring reversal and remand for further proceedings. |
Parsons v. WSI
2013 ND 235
Highlight: A claimant for workers' compensation benefits must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the medical condition for which benefits are sought is causally related to a work injury. |
State v. One 2002 Dodge Intrepid Automobile
2013 ND 234
Highlight: Due process requires that a notice of forfeiture hearing be served on any interested party. |
Matter of Muscha
2013 ND 233 Highlight: Order civilly committing appellant as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
State v. Fee (consol. 20130177)
2013 ND 232 Highlight: A district court judgment forfeiting property connected to criminal activity is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
State v. Ruddell
2013 ND 231 Highlight: A criminal judgment entered for abandonment or nonsupport of a child is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
State v. Kippen (consolidated w/20130263)
2013 ND 230 Highlight: Convictions of driving under the influence of alcohol and driving with a suspended license are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
State v. Kaka
2013 ND 229 Highlight: Conviction for burglary and theft of property is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
Johnson v. State
2013 ND 228 Highlight: Order dismissing application for post-conviction relief summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
Reciprocal Discipline of Murrin
2013 ND 227 Highlight: Lawyer suspension ordered. |
Industrial Contractors, Inc. v. WSI, et al.
2013 ND 226 Highlight: A district court judgment affirming an administrative law judge's order, which affirmed WSI's order awarding benefits to a claimant, is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
Vacancy in Judgeship No. 6, East Central Judicial District
2013 ND 225 Highlight: Judgeship retained at Fargo. |
State v. Rau
2013 ND 224 Highlight: A conviction of possession of drug paraphernalia is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
State v. Kling
2013 ND 223 Highlight: A criminal judgment for disorderly conduct is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7). |
Disciplinary Board v. Craft
2013 ND 222 Highlight: Lawyer suspension ordered. |
Disciplinary Board v. Wolff (Consol. w/ 20130268-20130273)
2013 ND 221 Highlight: Lawyer disbarment ordered. |
Reciprocal Discipline of Kalk
2013 ND 220 Highlight: Lawyer reprimanded. |
Wagner v. Crossland Construction Company, Inc., et al.
2013 ND 219
Highlight: Use of the words "subject to" in a warranty deed connotes a limitation on the grantor's warranty and not a reservation of rights. |
Van Sickle, et al. v. Hallmark & Assoc., Inc., et al. (cross-reference 20070154
2013 ND 218
Highlight: In a proceeding under N.D.C.C. 47-16-39.1 to recover unpaid oil and gas royalties, a "prevailing party" is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees. |
Oakland v. Bowman, et al.
2013 ND 217
Highlight: North Dakota has not adopted equitable tolling as an exception to a statute of limitations. |
Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Halvorson
2013 ND 216 Highlight: A party may renew a judgment by either complying with the affidavit procedure under N.D.C.C. 28-20-21 or commencing a separate action on the judgment. |
Estates of Shubert
2013 ND 215
Highlight: An appeal is moot if no actual controversy exists because subsequent events have made it impossible for the court to provide effective relief. |
Moore v. State
2013 ND 214
Highlight: On appeal of a summary dismissal of an application for postconviction relief, a reviewing court must determine whether or not the information available to the district court, when viewed in a light most favorable to the opposing party, precludes the existence of a genuine issue of material fact and entitles the moving party to summary dismissal as a matter of law. |
State v. Blagen
2013 ND 213 Highlight: Criminal judgment for possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and possession of drug paraphernalia is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
Wald v. Holmes
2013 ND 212
Highlight: The doctrine of res judicata should not be strictly applied to preclude the trial court from hearing for the first time relevant primary residential responsibility-related evidence bearing on considerations of what is in a child's best interests. |
Adoption of I.R.R. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2013 ND 211 Highlight: A parent's parental rights may be terminated by a court order in connection with an adoption action if the parent abandoned the child. |
Pesanti v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2013 ND 210 Highlight: Continuous and gradual weaving significantly more pronounced than "slight" weaving, engine revving, and the time of day an incident occurred may all contribute to the totality of the circumstances providing an officer with a reasonable and articulable suspicion for a traffic stop. |
Sateren v. Sateren (cross-referenced w/20120192)
2013 ND 209 Highlight: District court order explaining and reaffirming an earlier order denying reallocation of marital property and debt in a divorce case is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
State v. Klamm
2013 ND 208 Highlight: Criminal judgment after a defendant conditionally pled guilty to driving under the influence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
Interest of T.D., a Child (CONFIDENTIAL)
2013 ND 207 Highlight: Juvenile court judgment terminating father's parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
Interest of H.D. (Confidential)
2013 ND 206 Highlight: Continuing treatment order and involuntary treatment with medication order summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
Interest of C.N. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2013 ND 205
Highlight: As part of a deprived child analysis, a parent must demonstrate present capability, or capability within the near future, to be an adequate parent. |
State, et al. v. Eli
2013 ND 204 Highlight: Default judgment imputing minimum wage as basis for child support calculation for unemployed incarcerated obligor summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). |
Newman v. State
2013 ND 203 Highlight: District court order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7). |
State v. Klamm
2013 ND 202 Highlight: A district court judgment entered after a conditional guilty plea to driving under suspension is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (3), and (7). |
Davis v. State
2013 ND 201 Highlight: A district court judgment summarily dismissing an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7). |
City of Fargo v. White
2013 ND 200 Highlight: A district court's summary affirmance of a municipal court judgment under N.D.R.Crim.P. 37(l) may not occur at proceedings which occur before the trial anew. |
State v. Lattergrass
2013 ND 199 Highlight: A criminal judgment for simple assault on a peace officer is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
Peterson v. Pierce, et al.
2013 ND 198 Highlight: In a dispute over a lost rental payment, the judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
State v. Lang
2013 ND 197 Highlight: Conviction for theft of property is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
Danuser v. IDA Marketing Corp., et al.
2013 ND 196
Highlight: A director in a closely-held corporation may be liable to a single shareholder for actions that unfairly prejudice the shareholder. |