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.
4251 - 4300 of 12446 results
|
State v. Szklarski
2010 ND 205 Highlight: Judgment revoking probation summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Johnson (cross ref. 20100001)
2010 ND 204 Highlight: District court order denying a motion to extend the time to file a notice of appeal is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
|
Kidwell v. McLean County et al.
2010 ND 203 |
|
Vanderscoff v. Vanderscoff
2010 ND 202
Highlight: A motion for reconsideration may be treated as a motion to alter or amend a judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59(j) or as a motion for relief from a judgment or order under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b). |
|
Lange v. Dep't of Transp.
2010 ND 201
Highlight: An arrestee has the responsibility to assert the right to an independent chemical test for intoxication. |
|
Renville v. Renville
2010 ND 200 Highlight: Trial court's valuation of parties' business in divorce proceedings summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Joyce v. Joyce
2010 ND 199
Highlight: A prima facie case for a change of primary residential responsibility requires facts that, if proved at an evidentiary hearing, would support a change of custody that could be affirmed if appealed. |
|
Johnson v. N.D. Workforce Safety & Insurance, et al.
2010 ND 198 Highlight: In reapplying for workers compensation disability benefits, a claimant must show both a significant change in a compensable medical condition and an actual wage loss caused by the significant change in the medical condition. |
|
Hoggarth, et al. v. Kropp
2010 ND 197
Highlight: "Disorderly conduct" for the purposes of a disorderly conduct restraining order depends on the total behavior of the respondent, not merely the particular content of speech. |
|
Marsden v. Koop
2010 ND 196
Highlight: An extramarital relationship may be relevant to primary residential responsibility if the children were affected by it. |
|
R.F. v. M.M., et al. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 195
Highlight: When the plaintiff is not the appropriate party to bring an action under a statute, the court must give the party a reasonable time for ratification, joinder, or substitution of the real party in interest before dismissing the action. |
|
Entzie v. Entzie
2010 ND 194
Highlight: In calculating a child support obligation, a district court must specifically find an obligor's tax returns are not an adequate reflection of income or are not a reliable indicator of future income before the court can refuse to consider tax return information. |
|
State v. Fischer
2010 ND 193 Highlight: Criminal judgment for assault on a peace officer and terrorizing summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Interest of D.V.A. (CONFIDENTIAL) (Cross-Ref w/20080319)
2010 ND 192 Highlight: Order continuing commitment as sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
State v. Peltier
2010 ND 191 Highlight: Conviction on two counts of gross sexual imposition summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Matter of M.D. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 190 Highlight: Civil commitment of a sexually dangerous person summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Fehl-Haber v. State
2010 ND 189 Highlight: Judgment denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Pankowski
2010 ND 188 Highlight: Conviction of possession with intent to manufacture or deliver a controlled substance (methamphetamine) and with intent to flee or attempt to elude a police officer is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Lucas
2010 ND 187 Highlight: Rule 4.2 of the North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct, prohibiting attorneys from communicating with a represented party, applies to attorneys who are representing themselves. |
|
Sailer v. Sailer
2010 ND 185
Highlight: The substantive enforceability of a premarital agreement is a matter of law to be decided by the court. |
|
State v. Adams
2010 ND 184
Highlight: Those who voluntarily choose to live with probationers assume the risk that they, too, will have diminished Fourth Amendment rights in areas shared with the probationer. |
|
Quality Bank, et al. v. Cavett
2010 ND 183
Highlight: Whether a contract is unconscionable is a question of law for the court to decide and depends upon the factual circumstances of each case. |
|
Bjarko v. State (consolidated w/20100071)
2010 ND 182 Highlight: Judgment denying post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Kraft
2010 ND 181 Highlight: Judgment of conviction of manufacturing methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Darby v. State
2010 ND 180 Highlight: District court amended order denying an application for post-conviction relief summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Penor
2010 ND 179 Highlight: Criminal judgment for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Interest of B.B. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 178 Highlight: District court judgment terminating parental rights instead of ordering a guardianship is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4). |
|
State v. Jackson
2010 ND 177 Highlight: Driving under suspension conviction summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). |
|
Rayas v. Marchus, et al.
2010 ND 176 Highlight: Dismissal of case barred by the applicable statute of limitations is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). |
|
Thompson v. Jaeger
2010 ND 174
Highlight: A word or a phrase repeated in a constitutional provision is generally given the same meaning throughout the constitution. |
|
Adoption of S.M.G. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 173
Highlight: A district court's decision cannot be reviewed when the court does not provide any indication of the evidentiary and theoretical basis for its decis |
|
Interest of S.L.W. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 172
Highlight: An alleged father cannot, in a subsequent paternity action, challenge a prior judgment disestablishing the paternity of a presumed or adjudicated father based upon an allegation that the prior action was barred by the statute of limitations. |
|
Interest of Maedche
2010 ND 171 Highlight: North Dakota's commitment of sexually dangerous individuals statute is not unconstitutionally void for vagueness. |
|
Kannianen v. White
2010 ND 170 Highlight: When interpreting the language of a prior judgment, a court must presume that the original trial judge considered existing statutes and relevant caselaw, and intended the judgment to conform to the applicable legal standards. |
|
Investors Title Insurance Co. v. Herzig, et al. (Cross-Ref w/20090051)
2010 ND 169
Highlight: In construing a trust agreement, the primary objective is to ascertain the settlor's intent. |
|
Hector v. City of Fargo
2010 ND 168 Highlight: North Dakota law authorizes the creation of special improvement districts that include land outside the limits of a municipality. |
|
Ackre v. Chapman & Chapman, P.C.
2010 ND 167
Highlight: To have standing, a litigant must have suffered some threatened or actual injury resulting from the putatively illegal action, the asserted harm must not be a generalized grievance shared by all or a large class of citizens, and the litigant generally must assert his or her own legal rights and interests and cannot rest a claim for relief on the legal rights and interests of third parties. |
|
Schwarz, et al. v. Gierke
2010 ND 166
Highlight: A denial of a motion to compel arbitration is reviewed under the de novo standard, unless the lower court's decision was based on factual findings, in which case the clearly erroneous standard applies. |
|
Peterson v. Peterson
2010 ND 165
Highlight: In awarding spousal support, the district court must consider the relevant factors of the Ruff-Fischer guidelines. |
|
Bala, et al. v. State
2010 ND 164
Highlight: Eminent domain takes property because it is useful to the public, while the police power regulates the use of, or impairs rights in, property to prevent detriment to the public interest, and constitutional provisions against taking private property for public use without just compensation impose no barrier to the proper exercise of the police power. |
|
Matter of A.M. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 163
Highlight: Before an individual may be committed to the state hospital as a "sexually dangerous individual," the State must prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) the individual has engaged in sexually predatory conduct; (2) the individual has a congenital or acquired condition that is manifested by a sexual disorder, a personality disorder, or other mental disorder or dysfunction; (3) the condition makes the individual likely to engage in further acts of sexually predatory conduct which constitute a danger to the physical or mental health or safety of others; and (4) the individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior. |
|
Murphy v. Rossow
2010 ND 162
Highlight: A final judgment can be amended if it was the product of mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. |
|
Snyder v. Snyder
2010 ND 161
Highlight: A divorcing party near retirement is not per se entitled to a reduced support obligation upon retirement. When substantial uncertainty surrounds a future retirement, the proper remedy is to move for modification upon retirement. |
|
Matter of J.D.F. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 160
Highlight: Rule 2.2, N.D.R.App.P., applies only to appeals from orders terminating parental rights. |
|
Estate of Cashmore
2010 ND 159
Highlight: Once a final judgment or order has been entered approving a final accounting and distribution of estate property, the estate proceedings are concluded and the parties are not authorized to file a petition to approve an amended final accounting under the statute. |
|
Lechler v. Lechler
2010 ND 158
Highlight: In a custody dispute, a court may interview children in chambers provided no party objects. |
|
Interest of M.G. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 157 Highlight: Long-term and intensive treatment for a parent is not required if it cannot be successfully undertaken in time to enable the children to be returned to the parental home without causing severe dislocation from emotional attachments formed during long-term foster care. |
|
Praus v. Praus
2010 ND 156
Highlight: Procedural unconscionability focuses on the formation of a settlement agreement and the fairness of the bargaining process, while substantive unconscionability focuses on the harshness or one-sidedness of the agreement's provisions. |
|
Zutz, et al. v. Kamrowski, et al.
2010 ND 155 Highlight: Under Minnesota law, a county attorney's statutory duties include providing advice to county commissioners, and an absolute privilege attaches to allegedly defamatory statements made in a contract investigator's report to a county attorney on matters involved in a county commission's request for advice. |
|
Matter of A.M.W. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2010 ND 154
Highlight: A party seeking termination of the parent-child relationship in the context of an adoption must prove the elements necessary to support termination by clear and convincing evidence. |