Opinions

Walden v. Walden 2025 ND 32
Docket No.: 20240131
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: District courts must consider the Ruff-Fischer guidelines, the needs of the spouse seeking support, and the ability of the other spouse to pay when determining whether to award spousal support. A party who fails to provide evidence of net income waives any argument that he or she did not have the ability to pay spousal support.

A district court considers the Ruff-Fischer factors when distributing marital property. The court must consider the length of a marriage in determining an equitable division of the marital estate under the Ruff-Fischer guidelines. In a short-term marriage, the court may return to the parties what they brought into the marriage, but the division of property and debt must be equitable.

The guiding principle for an award of attorney's fees is one party's need and the other party's ability to pay. The district court may also consider whether a party's actions have unreasonably increased the time and efforts spent on the dispute.

Bullinger v. Sundog Interactive, Inc., et al. 2025 ND 31
Docket No.: 20240188
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court erred in its application of N.D.C.C. § 10-19.1-88.

The North Dakota Business Corporations Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 10-19.1, provides significant protections and remedies to minority shareholders. Upon the sale of a corporation, N.D.C.C. § 10-19.1-87 affords dissenting shareholders the option to obtain the fair value of their shares. Section 10-19.1-87, N.D.C.C., outlines the rights of dissenting shareholders and N.D.C.C. § 10-19.1-88 establishes the procedures for payment.

State v. Janachovsky 2025 ND 30
Docket No.: 20240198
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A criminal defendant who advises the district court that he intends to represent himself, and does so at each hearing after acknowledging an understanding of the rights afforded to him, constitutes the functional equivalent of a voluntary waiver of counsel.

A defendant knowingly and intelligently waives his right to counsel when he decides to represent himself after being advised the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation.

State v. Littleghost 2025 ND 29
Docket No.: 20240199
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted the defendant of robbery, accomplice to theft, and theft of a credit device is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).

Interest of B.V 2025 ND 28
Docket No.: 20240315
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The Indian Child Welfare Act ("ICWA") has no exception for incarceration and neither incarceration nor doubtful prospects for rehabilitation will relieve a Human Service Zone of its duty under ICWA to make active efforts. The circumstances surrounding a parent's incarceration may have a direct bearing on what active efforts are possible.

The juvenile court may consider a Human Service Zone's involvement in its entirety in evaluating active efforts rather than focusing on efforts directed at each parent individually.

ICWA does not clarify the scope of the expert testimony required, nor does it require that the expert testimony provide the sole basis for the juvenile court's conclusion.

Interest of B.V. 2025 ND 28
Docket No.: 20240316
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The Indian Child Welfare Act ("ICWA") has no exception for incarceration and neither incarceration nor doubtful prospects for rehabilitation will relieve a Human Service Zone of its duty under ICWA to make active efforts. The circumstances surrounding a parent's incarceration may have a direct bearing on what active efforts are possible.

The juvenile court may consider a Human Service Zone's involvement in its entirety in evaluating active efforts rather than focusing on efforts directed at each parent individually.

ICWA does not clarify the scope of the expert testimony required, nor does it require that the expert testimony provide the sole basis for the juvenile court's conclusion.

Almklov v. State 2025 ND 27
Docket No.: 20240166
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court's order summarily dismissing an application for postconviction relief is affirmed.

Access Independent Health Services, Inc., d/b/a Red River Women's Clinic. et al. v. Wrigley, et al. 2025 ND 26
Docket No.: 20240291
Filing Date: 1/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Constitutional Law
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Berger v. Repnow 2025 ND 25
Docket No.: 20240147
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The law on partition of property, N.D.C.C. ch. 32-16, controls the distribution of property accumulated by unmarried partners and cohabitants. Although legal ownership of property is strong evidence of an intention to not share property, legal ownership is not dispositive when the person who is not the legal owner has financially contributed to the acquisition of the property.

Section 32-16-01, N.D.C.C., authorizes proceedings to partition property according to the respective rights of the persons interested therein and for a sale of such property or a part thereof, if it appears that a partition cannot be made without great prejudice to the owners. Real and personal property may be partitioned in the same action.

Five elements are required to establish unjust enrichment: 1. An enrichment; 2. An impoverishment; 3. A connection between the enrichment and the impoverishment; 4. Absence of a justification for the enrichment and impoverishment; and 5. An absence of a remedy provided by law.

A reviewing court needs to know the reasons for the trial court's decision before it can intelligently rule on the issues, and if the trial court does not provide an adequate explanation of the evidentiary and legal basis for its decision, the reviewing court is left to merely speculate whether it properly applied the law.

State v. McCleary 2025 ND 24
Docket No.: 20240171
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Application of the Uniform Mandatory Disposition of Detainers Act is limited to those instances where a detainer has been filed against a person imprisoned in a penal or correctional institution in North Dakota already serving a sentence within the state.

The UMDDA does not apply to prisoners who have been released on parole because the person is no longer imprisoned serving a sentence for a term of commitment.

A defendant who stipulates the statutory habitual offender requirements were met waives any alleged procedural defects by the district court in applying the habitual offender sentencing enhancements.