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.
4451 - 4500 of 12250 results
|
Bruder v. WSI, et al.
2009 ND 23 Highlight: When there are conflicting expert medical opinions about the cause of a workers compensation claimant's medical condition, Workforce Safety and Insurance has the responsibility to weigh credibility and resolve conflicts in the evidence. |
|
Midthun v. Workforce Safety and Insurance, et al.
2009 ND 22
Highlight: A party appealing a hearing officer's decision must file reasonably specific specifications of error detailing which matters are at issue, so as to alert the agency, other parties, and the court of the particular errors claimed. |
|
Adoption of J.D.F. (Confidential)
2009 ND 21 Highlight: A district court must advise parents that they are entitled to representation by counsel, provided by the State if necessary, throughout any proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship against their will. |
|
Kelly v. Kelly
2009 ND 20 |
|
Adoption of H.G.C. (confidential)
2009 ND 19
Highlight: A parent's parental rights, including the right to withhold consent to an adoption, may be terminated if the parent has abandoned the minor child. |
|
Ulsaker v. White
2009 ND 18
Highlight: A long-term marriage supports an equal distribution of marital property. |
|
Reinholdt v. ND Dept. of Human Services
2009 ND 17 Highlight: If a Medicaid applicant has a legal ability to obtain an asset, it is considered an actually available resource. In determining whether an asset is actually available, the focus is on the Medicaid applicant's actual and practical ability to obtain the asset as a matter of fact, not of legal fiction. |
|
Hendrickson v. Olson
2009 ND 16
Highlight: The admissibility of evidence in any adjudicative proceeding before an administrative agency is determined under the rules of evidence unless there is a specific waiver stated orally or in writing before or at the hearing. |
|
City of Fargo v. Salsman
2009 ND 15
Highlight: A municipality has the authority to bring a nuisance abatement action. |
|
Hector, et al. v. City of Fargo
2009 ND 14
Highlight: The decision of a local governing body on whether to amend the city zoning map and growth plan will be affirmed unless the local body acted arbitrarily, capriciously or unreasonably, or if there is not sufficient evidence supporting the decision. |
|
Myers v. State (cross-reference 20050368)
2009 ND 13 Highlight: The failure to file a pretrial suppression motion alone is not enough to meet the burden of proving ineffective assistance of counsel; the petitioner must show actual prejudice. |
|
Citibank v. Reikowski
2009 ND 12 Highlight: Any action or proceeding involving an issue subject to arbitration shall be stayed if an application for stay has been made. |
|
Slorby v. Slorby
2009 ND 11
Highlight: If the language of a judgment is unambiguous and plain, neither construction nor interpretation is allowed, and the effect of the language must be based on the language's literal meaning. |
|
Doepke v. Doepke
2009 ND 10
Highlight: A court errs as a matter of law if it does not comply with the requirements of the child support guidelines when it determines a child support obligation. |
|
City of Fargo v. Lunday
2009 ND 9 Highlight: Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 29(a), a defendant in a criminal jury trial must still make a motion for judgment of acquittal to preserve the issue of the sufficiency of the evidence for appeal. |
|
State v. Scutchings
2009 ND 8 Highlight: A prosecutor's comment during closing arguments that the government's evidence is uncontradicted or unrebutted is improper if the only person who could have rebutted the evidence was the defendant testifying on his or her own behalf, and the defendant has chosen not to testify at the trial. |
|
State v. Walstad (Consolidated w/20080272 & 20080273)
2009 ND 7 Highlight: The district court's order denying defendant's motion for credit for time spent in custody is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (2). |
|
State v. Vick
2009 ND 6 Highlight: The district court's second amended judgment denying defendant's motion for additional credit for time spent in custody is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Geray v. Bertsch
2009 ND 5 Highlight: The district court's memorandum opinion and order denying defendant's motion to vacate is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), and plaintiff's request for attorney's fees on appeal is denied under N.D.R.App.P. 38. |
|
Pribyl v. State
2009 ND 4 Highlight: Order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Huffling
2009 ND 3 Highlight: If a sentence imposed by a trial court is within the range authorized by statute, this Court does not have the power to review the discretion of the sentencing court. |
|
State v. Cahoon
2009 ND 2 Highlight: Judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding appellant guilty of violating a disorderly conduct restraining order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Adoption of E.H.L. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2009 ND 1 Highlight: Judgment terminating father's parental rights and granting grandparents' petition to adopt the child is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Voigt v. State
2008 ND 236
Highlight: A party seeking to bring a claim against the State or its employees must strictly comply with the requirements of N.D.C.C. 32-12.2-04(1). |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Karlsen (Consolidated w/ 20080295)
2008 ND 235 Highlight: Lawyer disbarred. |
|
Clark v. State (Cross-reference w/20030238)
2008 ND 234
Highlight: The law does not require that an evidentiary hearing be held on an application for post-conviction relief when the parties do not request a hearing. |
|
Gustafson v. Gustafson
2008 ND 233
Highlight: When an award of spousal support is reversed, the party paying is entitled to restitution for any amount paid since entry of the district court judgment, unless it would be inequitable. |
|
State v. Lium (cross ref with 20070135)
2008 ND 232
Highlight: A defendant moving to withdraw his guilty plea before sentencing bears the burden of establishing a fair and just reason exists. |
|
City of Minot v. Rudolph
2008 ND 231
Highlight: Home rule charters permit cities to enact certain ordinances which differ from state laws. |
|
State v. Salter
2008 ND 230 Highlight: A driver's consent to chemical testing is implied if the statutory implied consent provisions have been met, and a driver must affirmatively refuse to submit to testing to withdraw the consent. |
|
Serr v. Serr (Cross-Ref w/20070231)
2008 ND 229 Highlight: To determine whether parents have equal physical custody of a child for purposes of applying child support guidelines, the actual language of the judgment controls. |
|
State v. Moos (Consolidated w/20080048)
2008 ND 228
Highlight: The Blockburger "same elements" test, used to determine whether two crimes constitute the same offense for purposes of double jeopardy, is merely a canon of statutory construction and is not controlling if the legislative intent is clear from the face of the statute or the legislative history. |
|
State v. Roth
2008 ND 227 Highlight: A defendant's probation can be revoked if he violates the conditions of probation while incarcerated or on parole on other charges. |
|
Schipper Construction, Inc. v. American Crystal Sugar Co.
2008 ND 226 Highlight: A notice of rescission must be clear, unambiguous, and unequivocal. |
|
Matter of Peterson's dogs
2008 ND 225
Highlight: When an animal has been confiscated under a law for humane treatment of animals, the owner is entitled to a hearing to determine whether the animal should be returned. |
|
Brummund v. Brummund
2008 ND 224
Highlight: Certification of an order or judgment as final under N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) is reserved for those cases involving unusual circumstances where failure to allow an immediate appeal would create demonstrated prejudice or hardship. |
|
State v. Uran
2008 ND 223
Highlight: A warrantless search of a home is not unreasonable if the search falls under an exception to the search warrant requirement. |
|
Matter of G.R.H. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2008 ND 222
Highlight: In reviewing the civil commitment of a sexually dangerous individual, all sexually predatory conduct, including that which did not result in a charge or conviction, may be considered. |
|
Siewert v. Siewert (Consolidated w/20080095)
2008 ND 221
Highlight: District courts have discretion to appoint a guardian ad litem in child custody modification cases. |
|
State v. Harlan
2008 ND 220 Highlight: Evidence discovered as a result of a pocket search following a safety pat-down search which provides no indication of a weapon or anything similar must be suppressed because the pocket search under such circumstances has exceeded the initial justification for the pat-down search. |
|
State v. Mosbrucker
2008 ND 219
Highlight: A victim must understand more than the physical aspects of sex to be capable of understanding the nature of a sexual act under N.D.C.C. 12.1-20-03(1)(e). |
|
Miller v. State
2008 ND 218 Highlight: District court order denying post-conviction relief and order confirming credit for incarceration summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
|
State v. Buck
2008 ND 217 Highlight: Judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding appellant guilty of driving while under the influence of alcohol is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Nemec
2008 ND 216 Highlight: Lawyer suspended from the practice of law. |
|
Disciplinary Board v. Sletten (Consolidated w/ 20080147 - 20080150)
2008 ND 215 Highlight: Lawyer disbarred. |
|
Hanisch v. Osvold
2008 ND 214
Highlight: A district court's award of custody is treated as a finding of fact and, on appeal, will not be reversed unless it is clearly erroneous under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a). |
|
State v. Evans
2008 ND 213 Highlight: Judgment entered upon a jury verdict finding appellant guilty of possession of a controlled substance is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
State v. Kruckenberg
2008 ND 212
Highlight: A defendant has the right to be present in the courtroom at every stage of the trial. |
|
Solem v. Solem
2008 ND 211
Highlight: An award of rehabilitative spousal support that is to last longer than the length of the marriage does not, alone, indicate the award is clearly erroneous. |
|
Matter of the Trust of Pederson
2008 ND 210
Highlight: A district court is not required to supervise a trust simply because an interested party requests supervision; rather, a petitioner must establish a justification for supervision of a trust. |