Search Tips

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.

691 - 700 of 12358 results

Hoffman v. Hoffman, et. al. 2023 ND 18
Docket No.: 20220142
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Unless an exception applies, a motion to modify primary residential responsibility filed within two years of the judgment establishing primary residential responsibility requires the movant to satisfy the heightened standard under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.6(3).

A district court’s decision on a motion to relocate is a finding of fact that will not be reversed on appeal unless clearly erroneous.

A district court is not required to hold a hearing under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a)(3) if a party does not request a hearing and secure a time for the hearing.

A district court is not required to consider an untimely declaration under N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a)(2).

Hoffman v. Hoffman, et. al. 2023 ND 18
Docket No.: 20220142
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Keidel v. WSI, et al. 2023 ND 17
Docket No.: 20220229
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Res judicata prohibits the relitigation of claims or issues that were raised or could have been raised in an earlier action between the same parties and was resolved by final judgment.

Administrative res judicata is the judicial doctrine of res judicata applied to an administrative proceeding. Administrative res judicata is applied more circumspectly than judicial res judicata, taking into account (1) the subject matter decided by the administrative agency, (2) the purpose of the administrative action, and (3) the reasons for the later proceeding.

WSI may not issue a permanent impairment award for impairment findings due to preexisting conditions.

Keidel v. WSI, et al. 2023 ND 17
Docket No.: 20220229
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Larson Latham Huettl v. Iversen 2023 ND 16
Docket No.: 20220198
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A party to a contract does not waive its contractual rights when its actions are expressly authorized by the terms of the contract.

When a contract has but a single object and such object is wholly impossible of performance, the entire contract is void.

The injured party has a duty to mitigate or minimize its damages and must protect itself if it can do so with reasonable exertion or at trifling expense, and can recover from the delinquent party only such damages as it could not, with reasonable effort, have avoided.

Continued employment for a substantial period of time is sufficient consideration to support an employment agreement.

A district court’s decision on a motion to alter or amend judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59(j) will not be reversed unless the court abused its discretion.

Issues that were not properly raised before the district court will not be considered on appeal.

Larson Latham Huettl v. Iversen 2023 ND 16
Docket No.: 20220198
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Reed v. Reed, et al. 2023 ND 15
Docket No.: 20220241
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: For child support purposes the definition of income is very broad and is intended to include any form of payment to an obligor, regardless of source, which is not specifically excluded under the guidelines.

Reed v. Reed, et al. 2023 ND 15
Docket No.: 20220241
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Sadek, et al. v. Weber, et al. 2023 ND 14
Docket No.: 20220155
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Rule 54(b), N.D.R.Civ.P., authorizes a district court to direct entry of a judgment adjudicating fewer than all of the claims as final when there is “no just reason for delay.” Absent a finality certification under Rule 54(b), a decision adjudicating fewer than all of the claims in a case does not end the action and it may be revised at any time before entry of a final judgment deciding all of the claims. Rule 54(b) does not apply when a judgment decides all of the claims in a case.

The district court did not err when it sanctioned an attorney under N.D.R.Civ.P. 11 after the attorney ignored provisions in rules and prior holdings the case.

Sanctions on appeal were appropriate when an attorney persisted in groundless arguments without acknowledging obvious deficiencies pointed out by the district court.

Sadek, et al. v. Weber, et al. 2023 ND 14
Docket No.: 20220155
Filing Date: 2/16/2023
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair
Page 70 of 1236