Opinions

Gum v. Muddy Boyz Drywall 2025 ND 111
Docket No.: 20250045
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A party does not have a right to appeal if there is no final judgment or proper N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) certification.

Kemp, et al. v. Kvislen, et al. 2025 ND 110
Docket No.: 20240356
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment denying a petition for nonparent custody or visitation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Gonzalez v. State 2025 ND 109
Docket No.: 20250019
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Generally, attacking an expired sentence is a moot argument. When the criminal judgment does not include a term of probation, the expired sentence does not continue to have collateral consequences. When a term of imprisonment has been completed, any additional credit for time served is academic and irrelevant. The Court does not render advisory opinions, and an appeal will be dismissed if the issues become moot or academic, leaving no actual controversy to be determined.

State v. Landsberger 2025 ND 108
Docket No.: 20240255
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Jury instructions are fully reviewable on appeal and are reviewed as a whole to determine if they correctly and adequately inform the jury of the applicable law.

Jury instructions will not be reversed unless the instructions as a whole are erroneous, relate to a central subject in the case, and affect a substantial right of the accused.

Interest of M.K. 2025 ND 107
Docket No.: 20250140
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

State v. Lampert 2025 ND 106
Docket No.: 20240271
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A jury's verdict was summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). A district court's order was summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Weber v. Pennington 2025 ND 105
Docket No.: 20240323
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A party seeking modification of primary residential responsibility two years after entry of the prior order establishing primary residential responsibility must establish a prima facie case justifying modification.

A party must show a material change in circumstances and either a general decline in the condition of the child or that the material change has adversely affected the child.

A party moving for primary residential responsibility is entitled to an evidentiary hearing only if new facts have arisen since the prior order constituting a material change of circumstances, and if modification serves the best interests of the child.

Parents have a mutual responsibility to provide support for their children regardless of if the need arises during a parent's specified parenting time. A party must show a child has been adversely affected for there to be a material change in circumstances which warrants modification of the residential responsibility order.

Interest of C.B. 2025 ND 104
Docket No.: 20240350
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order extending placement of a child in the custody and control of the Grand Forks County Human Service Zone for a period of twelve months after finding the child is a child in need of protection is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

State v. Leingang 2025 ND 103
Docket No.: 20240243
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Issues not raised at trial will not be addressed on appeal unless the alleged error rises to the level of obvious error under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b). To establish obvious error, the defendant has the burden to demonstrate plain error which affected his substantial rights. However, if a party fails to argue obvious error, it is difficult for this Court to conclude this burden has been satisfied and this Court need not address it further.

Under Rule 1004(a), N.D.R.Ev., an original is not required, and other evidence of the content of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible if all the originals are lost or destroyed, and not by the proponent acting in bad faith.

Interest of C.B. 2025 ND 102
Docket No.: 20250112
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Interest of M.B. 2025 ND 102
Docket No.: 20250113
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Interest of D.B. 2025 ND 102
Docket No.: 20250111
Filing Date: 6/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

State v. Weltikol 2025 ND 99
Docket No.: 20240336
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

State v. Lewellyn 2025 ND 98
Docket No.: 20240295
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: To determine whether a defendant's right to counsel has been violated, this Court has developed a two-step inquiry: (1) whether the defendant's waiver was voluntary; and (2) whether the defendant's waiver was knowing and intelligent. A defendant may indicate a voluntary desire for self-representation with an unequivocal statement or with conduct that is the functional equivalent of such a statement. A knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel depends on the facts and circumstances and requires the defendant to be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation so the record establishes the defendant knows what he is doing and his choice is made with eyes open.

Motions for continuance must be promptly filed as soon as the grounds are known and will be granted only for good cause shown. This Court will not reverse a district court's decision to deny a continuance absent an abuse of discretion.

State v. Lewellyn 2025 ND 97
Docket No.: 20240294
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: This Court will not consider an argument that is not adequately articulated, supported, and briefed.

A party waives an error when the party is given the opportunity to address it and intentionally relinquishes the opportunity.

Van Beek v. Van Beek, et al. 2025 ND 96
Docket No.: 20240319
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court may consider economic misconduct as a basis for an unequal distribution of the marital estate. However, this Court has not previously recognized economic misconduct as a basis for increasing the marital estate through "potential" income or by imputing income.

Attorney's fees awarded under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-29(4) against a perpetrator of domestic violence extends to the recovery for the costs and attorney's fees incurred in a subsequent appeal.

Severson v. Gupta, et al. 2025 ND 101
Docket No.: 20240292
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Personal Injury
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An appeal from a district court judgment granting a motion for summary judgment is reviewed under the de novo standard.

N.D.R.Civ.P. 56 allows a court to grant summary judgment for prompt and expeditious disposition of a controversy without a trial if either party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and if no dispute exists as to either the material facts or the inferences to be drawn from undisputed facts, or if resolving disputed facts would not alter the result.

A district court did not err granting a motion for summary judgment dismissing a claim of medical malpractice because the plaintiff failed to provide an affidavit containing an expert opinion as required by N.D.C.C. § 28-01-46.

Holm v. Holm 2025 ND 100
Docket No.: 20240246
Filing Date: 5/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: This Court may summarily affirm judgments and orders when briefs do not meet the minimum requirements of the North Dakota Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Under the applicable rules, if an electronically filed document is rejected, the tolling of the filing does not change the date of service, which is the date the document was transmitted.

The statutory default valuation date under N.D.C.C. § 14-05-24(1) is "sixty days before the initially scheduled trial date," not the date of trial.

When a court uses the parties' mutually agreed-to valuations, the court's finding of a different valuation date is harmless as to those assets and debts.

A district court places a value on martial property based on the evidence presented by the parties. When the court is "not given much information" regarding the value of a marital asset, the court's decision is limited by the parties' failure to provide information.

ICON HD v. National Sports Opportunity Partners, et al. 2025 ND 95
Docket No.: 20240265
Filing Date: 5/8/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A party must include affirmative defenses in its responsive pleading.

A party may have privity with another party that bars new litigation under res judicata.

Releases contained in a settlement agreement are subject to normal rules of contract interpretation.

Nagle v. Nagle 2025 ND 94
Docket No.: 20240260
Filing Date: 5/8/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Interlocutory orders in an action are merged into the final judgment and may be reviewed on appeal of that judgment.

A district court considers the Ruff-Fischer guidelines when distributing marital property. The "duration of the marriage" factor is only one factor and is the length of the marriage being dissolved by the court, irrespective of whether there was a prior marriage or marriages with the same party or another person.

In a short-term marriage, the district court may return to the parties what they brought into the marriage, but the division of property and debt must be equitable.

Matter of Robinson 2025 ND 93
Docket No.: 20250057
Filing Date: 5/8/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A person with a felony conviction petitioning for a name change must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the name change request is not based upon an intent to defraud or mislead, is made in good faith, will not cause injury to an individual, and will not compromise public safety.

ND Indoor RV Park v. State, et al. 2025 ND 92
Docket No.: 20240293
Filing Date: 5/8/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The right to appeal is governed by statute, and without a statutory basis to hear an appeal, we do not have jurisdiction and we must dismiss the appeal.

This Court's authority to issue supervisory writs is derived from Art. VI, § 2, N.D. Const., which vests this Court with appellate and original jurisdiction with authority to issue, hear, and determine such original and remedial writs as may be necessary to properly exercise its jurisdiction. This Court exercises its discretionary authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously, and only in cases when no adequate alternative remedy exists.

Public officials are protected by qualified immunity unless it is shown that (1) the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.

To prove a substantive due process violation, one must establish a constitutionally protected property interest and that a public official used their power in such an arbitrary and oppressive way that it shocks the conscience.

To prove a procedural due process violation, one must establish that: (1) a public official deprived them of some life, liberty, or property interest, and (2) the deprivation of that interest was done without due process. Procedural due process necessitates a notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard.

Dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is generally appropriate if the plaintiff fails to exhaust administrative remedies.

State v. Taylor 2025 ND 91
Docket No.: 20240033
Filing Date: 5/8/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The omission of a single juror's response to a jury poll in a trial transcript does not establish a violation of the constitutional right to a unanimous verdict when the record sufficiently demonstrates the existence of other safeguards ensuring that the jury was properly impaneled and returned a unanimous verdict free of coercion or pressure.

The district court has wide discretion over the mode and order of presenting evidence, and over the use of extrinsic evidence to refresh memory or impeach a witness based on a prior inconsistent statement.

A sentencing decision will only be vacated if the district court acted outside the limits prescribed by statute or substantially relied on an impermissible factor in determining the severity of the sentence.

Vacancy in Judgeship No. 4, NECJD 2025 ND 90
Docket No.: 20250094
Filing Date: 4/30/2025
Case Type: Judicial Administration - Vacancy - Vacancy
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Judgeship retained at Grand Forks

Vacancy in Judgeship No. 1, SCJD 2025 ND 89
Docket No.: 20250083
Filing Date: 4/28/2025
Case Type: Judicial Administration - Vacancy - Vacancy
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Judgeship retained at Bismarck

Fowler v. Fowler, et al. 2025 ND 88
Docket No.: 20240308
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An attorney's fees sanction under N.D.R.Civ.P. 11 must comply with safeguards in the rule.

A court abuses its discretion by deeming an action frivolous if the claim is grounded in a good faith argument for an extension of the current interpretation of the law.

A party is not entitled to attorney's fees under N.D.R.App.P. 38 if the action is not frivolous.

Zittleman v. Bibler, et al. 2025 ND 87
Docket No.: 20240196
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A party's due process rights were not violated by limiting the time of a hearing and preemptively allocating time to both parties.

A district court did not abuse its discretion when it limits the length of a hearing.

If a party desires more time for a hearing than a district court has scheduled, the party must object to the time limitations or move for a continuance.

A district court is not required to conduct a best interests analysis if it finds there has been no material change in circumstances.

A district court is not required to modify a residential responsibility judgment beyond the motion requested by a party.

State v. Brown 2025 ND 86
Docket No.: 20240225
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: This Court reviews an appeal from the dismissal of a criminal charge after a preliminary hearing under the abuse of discretion standard of review.

At a preliminary hearing the State must produce sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that a crime has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty of committing the crime.

Lowe v. WSI 2025 ND 85
Docket No.: 20250014
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's judgment affirming an administrative law judge's decision is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).

Skobodzinski v. NDDOT 2025 ND 84
Docket No.: 20240241
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A motor vehicle operator arrested for driving under the influence or being in actual physical control has a limited statutory right to consult with an attorney.

A person arrested for driving under the influence who asks to consult with an attorney before deciding to take a chemical test must be given a reasonable opportunity to do so if it does not materially interfere with the administration of the test.

Whether a person has been afforded a reasonable opportunity to speak with an attorney is determined by conducting an objective review of the totality of the circumstances.

The appropriate inquiry is whether the police afforded an arrestee a reasonable opportunity to consult with counsel in a meaningful way.

State v. Burton 2025 ND 83
Docket No.: 20240286
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Under the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause, in all criminal prosecutions, the accused has the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him. The admission of out-of-court testimonial statements in criminal cases is precluded, unless the witness is unavailable to testify and the accused has had an opportunity to cross-examine the declarant.

Statements are nontestimonial when the primary purpose is to enable police assistance to meet an ongoing emergency, and are considered testimonial when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no such ongoing emergency, and that the primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.

Rule 901, N.D.R.Ev., provides for methods of authentication of evidence. All authentication requires is that the party offering an item of evidence produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is.

Rule 803(1), N.D.R.Ev., provides an exception to the rule against hearsay for a statement describing or explaining an event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant perceived the event or condition. Because N.D.R.Ev. 803(1) applied, a district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting a 911 call recording into evidence.

Western Equipment Finance v. Sergei Tumas Productions, et al. 2025 ND 82
Docket No.: 20240309
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment granting summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (6).

State v. Lafromboise 2025 ND 81
Docket No.: 20240325
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: In a criminal case, the State may appeal from an order quashing an information or indictment or any count thereof. A dismissal for lack of probable cause, whether labeled an "order" or a "judgment," is appealable.

Probable cause exists when the facts and circumstances are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution in believing an offense has been or is being committed. The State is not required to prove with absolute certainty or beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime occurred, but rather need only produce sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that a crime has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty.

To satisfy its probable cause burden, the State must have presented reasonable grounds to believe the defendant intended to place another human being in fear for that human being's or another's safety, or acted with reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror, and threatened to commit a crime of violence or act dangerous to human life.

Dennis v. Dennis, et al. 2025 ND 80
Docket No.: 20240288
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A divorce judgment entered after a bench trial is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Matter of Emelia Hirsch Trust 2025 ND 79
Docket No.: 20240313
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court order for contempt is affirmed.

State v. Ziegler 2025 ND 78
Docket No.: 20240269
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Mischief
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury conviction of criminal mischief and stalking is affirmed.

Without foundation testimony from the insurer, an insurer's letters regarding valuation of property constitute inadmissible hearsay if offered to prove value of the property at issue.

Under the property owner rule, an owner may testify about the value of his property even if his opinion relies upon information from another.

A district court's evidentiary error is harmless if improperly admitted evidence amounted to cumulative evidence.

Holte, et al. v. Rigby, et al. 2025 ND 77
Docket No.: 20240244
Filing Date: 4/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court judgment entered after a bench trial is reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings.

If a trustee who is also one of the beneficiaries commits a breach of trust, the other beneficiaries are entitled to a charge upon his beneficial interest to secure their claims against him for the breach of trust. If a trustee-beneficiary has only a life interest in trust income, however, his beneficial interest terminates upon his death. Co-trustees may not offset against a life beneficiary's distribution to recoup losses resulting from the previous life beneficiary's breach of trust.

Because an equitable lien attaches to an asset as security, it is improper to attach an equitable lien to an asset in which a deceased debtor had only a life interest.

K.L.T., et al. v. NDDHHS 2025 ND 76
Docket No.: 20240299
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Certified Question of Law
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The Court declined to answer the following certified question of law: "Is an unmarried couple able [to] adopt children under N.D.C.C. § 14-15-03(2)?"

Rule 47.1 of the North Dakota Rules of Appellate Procedure authorize the Court to answer questions of law certified by a state district court when two conditions are met: (A) there is a question of law involved in the proceeding that is determinative of the proceeding; and (B) it appears to the district court that there is no controlling precedent in the decisions of the supreme court.

When the district court has not halted proceedings, but rather has concluded them by dismissing the complaint, the certification procedure does not apply.

State v. Allman 2025 ND 75
Docket No.: 20240250
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52, any error, defect, irregularity or variance that does not affect substantial rights must be disregarded. The harmless error doctrine recognizes the principle that the central purpose of a criminal trial is to decide the factual question of the defendant's guilt or innocence and promotes respect for the criminal process by focusing on the underlying fairness of the trial.

Criminal defendants are presumed fit to stand trial. A defendant that lacks fitness to proceed cannot be tried, convicted, or sentenced.

Parties seeking a court order must make a motion. When a defendant is represented by counsel, the defendant generally has no authority to file pro se motions, and the court should not consider them.

A district court need give credit toward only one of the consecutive terms of imprisonment it imposes.

A speedy trial claim is evaluated under the four-part test in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), considering the (1) length of the delay, (2) reason for the delay, (3) proper assertion of the right, and (4) actual prejudice to the accused.

WSI v. Jones, et al. 2025 ND 74
Docket No.: 20240283
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Workers Compensation
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Title 65, N.D.C.C., does not specify where Workforce Safety and Insurance may appeal an administrative decision. Under N.D.C.C. § 28-32-42(3)(a), when no jurisdiction is designated by another law, appeals from administrative orders may be taken (1) to the district court of the county in which the hearing or part thereof was held, or (2) if there was no formal hearing, an appeal may be taken to the district court of Burleigh County.

State v. Ali 2025 ND 73
Docket No.: 20240281
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: This Court cannot discern a guilty plea is conditional when the judgment does not show the plea was conditional, the record does not show an order accepting the conditional plea, and there is no transcript showing the guilty plea was conditional or that the district court consented to the entry of a conditional guilty plea.

Bauer v. Job Service, et al. 2025 ND 72
Docket No.: 20250003
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Unemployment/Job Service
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment affirming a Job Service of North Dakota decision is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5).

State v. Krebs 2025 ND 71
Docket No.: 20240355
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: The State's appeal from a district court's judgment of acquittal entered after the court granted the defendant's renewed N.D.R.Crim.P. 29 motion is dismissed.

The court's ruling that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the defendant's conviction is a true judgment of acquittal from which the State is not permitted to appeal.

The Court exercises its authority to issue supervisory writs rarely and cautiously, and only to rectify errors and prevent injustice in extraordinary cases when no adequate alternative exists.

The fact that the State may be unable to appeal the district court's ruling does not necessarily create extraordinary circumstances justifying supervisory jurisdiction.

State v. Lyons 2025 ND 70
Docket No.: 20240326
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying a N.D.R.Crim.P. 35 motion to correct an illegal sentence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7).

Shively v. Shively 2025 ND 69
Docket No.: 20240284
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court's judgment is reversed and remanded for reconsideration and a reasoned explanation of the district court's award of primary residential responsibility and parenting time, and distribution of property.

A district court's findings of fact must be stated with sufficient specificity to enable a reviewing court to understand the factual basis for its decisions.

In cases where a party has requested equal parental responsibility, and particularly where the court finds the parties are able to effectively communicate with each other, the district court must consider equal residential responsibility
and articulate its reasoning sufficiently for appellate review.

A district court's failure to explain the absence of extended summer parenting time is error, requiring remand for reconsideration and a reasoned explanation of the court's decision.

While the marital home need not be irrevocably set aside to an heir, we have also explained that inherited property should be set aside to the heir where fairly possible.

Kinden v. Kinden, et al. 2025 ND 68
Docket No.: 20240226
Filing Date: 4/10/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court's order and judgment awarding primary residential responsibility is affirmed.

Section 14-09-06.6, N.D.C.C., governs modifications of primary residential responsibility. When a party moves to modify a judgment awarding joint residential responsibility, N.D.C.C. § 14-09-06.6 does not apply. The district court must instead make an original determination regarding primary residential responsibility.

We will not retry a primary residential responsibility case or substitute our judgment for a district court's initial primary residential responsibility decision merely because we might have reached a different result. A choice between two permissible views of the weight of the evidence is not clearly erroneous, and our deferential review is especially applicable for a difficult primary residential responsibility decision involving two fit parents.

Vacancy in Judgeship No. 1, NCJD 2025 ND 67
Docket No.: 20250044
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Judicial Administration - Vacancy - Vacancy
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Judgeship retained at Minot

Williamson v. State 2025 ND 66
Docket No.: 20240155
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An affirmative defense is waived if it is not pleaded. A waived defense is not grounds for dismissal of an application for postconviction relief.

Defendants who inexcusably fail to raise all of their claims in a single postconviction proceeding misuse the postconviction process by initiating a subsequent application raising issues that could have been raised in the earlier proceeding. When the State has pleaded the defense of misuse of process, and a misuse of process has occurred, dismissal of an application for postconviction relief will be affirmed even if dismissal was ordered on other erroneous grounds.

There is no constitutional right to counsel for postconviction proceedings. Absent a constitutional rule guaranteeing effective postconviction counsel, statutory law controls. Under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09(2), ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel claims are prohibited, and the court is not required to wait for the State to file a motion before dismissing such claims.

State v. Littleghost 2025 ND 65
Docket No.: 20240186
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A court's acceptance of a guilty plea must be accompanied by a factual basis under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(3).

A court must find that the factual basis satisfies all elements of the crime charged.

A factual basis may be established by statements from the defendant or the attorneys, from a presentence report, or by whatever other means is appropriate, from the court's record.

A court must state what it relies on for a factual basis. Statements made in violation of Miranda must be incriminating.

State v. Littleghost 2025 ND 65
Docket No.: 20240187
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A court's acceptance of a guilty plea must be accompanied by a factual basis under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(3).

A court must find that the factual basis satisfies all elements of the crime charged.

A factual basis may be established by statements from the defendant or the attorneys, from a presentence report, or by whatever other means is appropriate, from the court's record.

A court must state what it relies on for a factual basis. Statements made in violation of Miranda must be incriminating.

Killoran, et al. v. Kaler 2025 ND 64
Docket No.: 20240290
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: When a motion to dismiss is based on different grounds than the ground the district court relied on to dismiss a claim, the court is required to give the parties notice of its intent to dismiss on new grounds and provide an opportunity to respond.

A district court errs by misapplying the requirements of N.D.R.Civ.P. 8(a) and the standards for determining a motion to dismiss under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) when it demands more than "a short and plain statement of the claim," demands factual evidence to support the allegations, does not accept the allegations in the complaint as true, and does not construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.

A complaint does not need to allege facts in anticipation of an affirmative defense.

In a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, a district court must make the initial decision of whether the alleged conduct can reasonably be considered "extreme and outrageous." A court does not focus exclusively on the conduct and words, but considers the facts and circumstances on a case-by-case basis.

State v. Helland 2025 ND 63
Docket No.: 20240224
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A district court has inherent power to take judicial notice in a preliminary proceeding where the rules of evidence do not apply, provided certain standards are met.

The requirement in N.D.C.C. § 62.1-02-01(1)(b) that the predicate misdemeanor offense be "committed while using or possessing a firearm" does not require the use or possession of a firearm be an element of the predicate offense. Moreover, the requirement in section 62.1-02-01(1)(b) that the predicate misdemeanor offense be "committed while using or possessing a firearm" does not require the use or possession of the firearm in committing the predicate offense be proven or admitted to in the predicate criminal action.

0n a prosecution under N.D.C.C. § 62.1-02-01(1)(b), the State has the burden to prove the defendant used or possessed a firearm when the defendant committed the predicate offense.

Under N.D.C.C. § 62.1-02-01(2)(b), a "conviction" includes a deferred imposition of sentence. A deferred imposition of sentence no longer exists when the court sets aside the verdict of guilty and dismisses the information. Section 62.1-02-01(2)(b) refers to a conviction for a deferred imposition of sentence that has not been dismissed.

Hoff v. City of Burlington 2025 ND 62
Docket No.: 20240081
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: The district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding the petitioner did not establish a clear legal right to the city's issuance of a certificate of occupancy for his remodeled home that is out of compliance with the city's ordinances.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying declaratory judgment plaintiff constructed an addition to his home in accordance with the city's ordinances when the evidence supports the court's findings the plaintiff did not comply with the city's ordinances.

A total regulatory taking occurs when regulations completely deprive an owner of all economically beneficial use of an owner's property. For total regulatory takings, the complete elimination of a property's value is the determinative factor because the total deprivation of beneficial use is, from the landowner's point of view, the equivalent of a physical appropriation.

If a "special relationship" is established under the four elements provided by statute, a political subdivision may be liable for damages for injuries proximately caused by the negligence or wrongful act or omission of an employee acting within the scope of the employee's employment.

Jones v. Jones 2025 ND 61
Docket No.: 20240212
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A district court's award of primary residential responsibility is a finding of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review. A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if it is induced by an erroneous view of the law, if no evidence exists to support it, or if, after reviewing the entire record, this Court is left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made.

The district court does not retain continuing jurisdiction to modify a final property distribution.

Except as may be required by federal law for specific property, the valuation date for marital property and debt is the date mutually agreed upon between the parties. If the parties do not mutually agree upon a valuation date, the valuation date for marital property and debt is sixty days before the initially scheduled trial date. If there is a substantial change in value of an asset or debt between the date of valuation and the date of trial, the court may adjust the valuation of that asset or debt as necessary to effect an equitable distribution and shall make specific findings that another date of valuation is fair and equitable.

Spousal support and property distribution are interrelated and intertwined and must be considered together.

A party may not raise an issue or contention that was not previously raised or considered in the lower court for the first time on appeal.

When calculating child support, there must be evidence of the value of the items a party seeks to have included as in-kind income before the trial court may include those items in calculating an obligor's gross income.

After awarding spousal support, the district court must include that amount as a part of gross income when calculating child support.

State v. Gomez 2025 ND 60
Docket No.: 20240144
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Section 12.1-32-02(2), N.D.C.C., requires the time spent in custody to be as a result of either the charge for which the sentence was imposed or the conduct on which the charge was based.

The Court will review a claim of an illegal sentence even when the defendant did not raise this argument below by objecting at sentencing or through a motion under N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(a).

Any credit for good time the defendant is entitled to must be stated in the criminal judgment.

State v. Alg 2025 ND 59
Docket No.: 20240190
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted the defendant of gross sexual imposition is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Matter of Didier 2025 ND 58
Docket No.: 20240264
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the State's only witness to appear remotely using reliable electronic means.

The factual basis was sufficient to conclude Didier has an inability to control his behavior. An order denying his petition for discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Estate of Kautzman 2025 ND 57
Docket No.: 20240256
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A two-step analysis is required to determine whether an order is appealable. First, for this Court to have appellate jurisdiction, the order being appealed must meet statutory criteria for appealability. Second, for this Court to consider the appeal at this time, the requirements of N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) must have been satisfied.

Interest of H.N.R. 2025 ND 56
Docket No.: 20240311
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Adoption
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Pursuant to N.D.C.C. § 14-15-11(7), a copy of the petition and the notice of the time and place for the hearing must be provided to each living parent of the adult to be adopted.

Pursuant to N.D.C.C. § 14-15-11(8), service must be accomplished in the same manner as required for service of process under the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure or in any manner the court directs.

Byrd v. State 2025 ND 55
Docket No.: 20240252
Filing Date: 3/28/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court order and judgment denying an application for postconviction relief is affirmed.

Conspiracy to commit intentional murder under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-16-01(1)(a) is a cognizable offense.

A defendant pleads guilty by Alford plea to a cognizable offense if sufficient factual basis supports the conviction. A simultaneous Alford plea to a noncognizable offense may be harmless error.

State v. Williams 1 7.N.W3 d820
Docket No.: 20240203
Filing Date: 3/20/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

State v. Rolland 1 1.N.W3 d761
Docket No.: 20230313
Filing Date: 3/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Whether a criminal defendant is competent to stand trial is a question of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. When a court has found a defendant facing felony charges to be unfit to proceed, N.D.C.C. § 12.1-04-08 contemplates attempted rehabilitation.

Ceynar v. Ceynar 2025 ND 53
Docket No.: 20240194
Filing Date: 3/6/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: In general, a lengthy marriage supports an equal division of all marital assets. The origin of the property, such as inheritance, is only one factor to consider under the Ruff-Fischer guidelines.

Preserving the viability of a business operation like a family farm is important and liquidation of an ongoing farming operation or business is ordinarily a last resort. This laudable purpose, however, is to be achieved only if it is possible to do so without detriment to the other party. The goal of preserving a farming business does not call for a windfall for one spouse. Property divisions are based on the particular circumstances of each case. Ordering the sale of a ranch is not erroneous where the party challenging the sale only proposed an unequal division of the property and did not show he depends on the ranching operation for his livelihood; the location, quantity, or value of the minerals is relatively unknown; and the ranch would otherwise be difficult to divide.

State v. Medina 2025 ND 52
Docket No.: 20240249
Filing Date: 3/6/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Other
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order revoking probation is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7).

Hersha v. State 2025 ND 51
Docket No.: 20240270
Filing Date: 3/6/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Zent v. NDDHHS 2025 ND 50
Docket No.: 20240222
Filing Date: 3/6/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Administrative Proceeding
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: The Court affirms the Department of Health and Human Services Division of Vocational Rehabilitation decision to discontinue vocational rehabilitation services.

The application and interpretation of a statute is a question of law that is fully reviewable in an administrative appeal.

Administrative regulations are derivatives of statutes and are construed under rules of statutory construction. Statutory interpretation is a question of law, fully reviewable on appeal.

The North Dakota Department of Health and Human Services administers vocational rehabilitation services with federal funding through the State Vocational Rehabilitation Services Program. The federal statutes and attendant regulations governing the State Vocational Rehabilitation Program are clear that the provision of vocational rehabilitation services is premised on assisting disabled individuals achieve competitive integrated employment. To satisfy the requirements of competitive integrated employment, a job position must meet each of the elements articulated under 34 C.F.R. §?361.5(c)(9). Whether a job position meets the requirements of competitive integrated employment is determined on a case-by-case basis.

The clear and convincing standard applies only to eligibility determinations for vocational rehabilitation services. For all other agency determinations, the preponderance of the evidence standard applies.

Disciplinary Board v. Spencer 2025 ND 49
Docket No.: 20240339
Filing Date: 2/27/2025
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Suspension
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Lawyer suspension ordered.

Higgins, et al. v. Lund, et al. 2025 ND 47
Docket No.: 20240083
Filing Date: 2/27/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Oil, Gas and Minerals
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A judgment which adjudicates all claims and does not anticipate or direct further action is appealable.

When interpreting a contract, N.D.C.C. § 9-07-06 provides that the whole of a contract is to be taken together so as to give effect to every part if reasonably practicable. If the granting clause describes the land as being an undivided interest in the land and a subsequent reservation which reserves a fractional part of the "land conveyed," or words of similar import, the reservation will be construed as reserving to the grantor the stated fractional interest of the fraction described in the granting clause.

A Duhig problem does not arise when a grantor, who owns an undivided onehalf (1/2) interest in a parcel of land via partnership, conveys the undivided onehalf (1/2) interest in the land's surface and a one-fourth (1/4) interest in land's minerals but reserves for himself the other one-fourth (1/4) interest in the minerals of the same land.

An oral contract can be enforced only when the parties have agreed on its essential terms. Indefiniteness as to any essential element of the agreement may prevent the creation of an enforceable contract. Stipulations as to the law are also invalid.

Language tying a royalty interest to another interest, such as a one-eighth royalty interest of an eight percent interest, creates a floating royalty.

State v. Williams 2025 ND 46
Docket No.: 20240203
Filing Date: 2/27/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A Brady violation is established when the defendant proves the government possessed evidence favorable to the defendant, the defendant did not possess the evidence and could not have obtained it with reasonable diligence, the prosecution suppressed the evidence, and a reasonable probability exists that the outcome of the proceedings would have been different if the evidence had been disclosed.

To prevail on a Brady claim a defendant must satisfy all four prongs or factors of the legal test.

When an issue is not raised at the trial court, this Court will not address the issue on appeal unless the alleged error rises to the level of obvious error.

A defendant's due process rights may be violated by a prosecutor's actions that constitute misconduct that has a prejudicial effect.

Hoistad v. NDDOT 2025 ND 45
Docket No.: 20240297
Filing Date: 2/27/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: The Department bears the burden of proving a chemical breath test result was fairly administered. If the Department fails to establish compliance with the approved method which goes to the scientific accuracy and reliability of the test, the Department must prove fair administration of the test through expert testimony.

When it is ready for the second breath sample, the Intoxilyzer 8000 displays, "Please Blow Until Tone Stops." The word "until" in this context signifies the point at which the driver should cease blowing into the instrument. Repeatedly blowing into the Intoxilyzer after the tone stopped is contrary to the instructions displayed by the Intoxilyzer 8000 and, thus, the approved method.

Unless the impact of a deviation is within the knowledge of an ordinary person, it is the Department's burden to show through expert testimony whether a deviation from the approved method impacted the accuracy and reliability of the test. An ordinary person does not know what impact, if any, a subject's repeated blowing into the Intoxilyzer after the tone stops has on the test results.

When the officer's deviations from the approved method involve the procedures for collecting and testing the sample, it raises the possibility that the deviation impacted the test result.

Even though the Department's action is not upheld by a court, a party is not entitled to attorney's fees and costs under N.D.C.C. § 28-32-50(1) when the Department acted with substantial justification in its decision.

State v. Plentychief 2025 ND 44
Docket No.: 20240334
Filing Date: 2/27/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: Motion to reconsider order of dismissal denied.

Anderson v. Foss, et al. 1 0.N.W3 d570
Docket No.: 20240008
Filing Date: 2/27/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion when setting the commencement date for the new child support obligation one year from the date of the motion to modify.

A district court did not err in ruling that timely requests for health insurance related reimbursements was not necessary when the requests became futile and when the amount owed to the parent making the requests is the same amount each month.

A district court's findings removing one parent's ability to make day-to-day decisions are not clearly erroneous.

Edwards v. State 2025 ND 43
Docket No.: 20240042
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: An applicant for postconviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel must satisfy the test in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688-90 (1984). Under Strickland's test, the applicant must show that (1) counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome.

Interest of S.F. 2025 ND 42
Docket No.: 20240337
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7).

State, et al. v. Carrier 2025 ND 41
Docket No.: 20240210
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Child support determinations involve questions of law, which are fully reviewable, findings of fact subject to the clearly erroneous standard, and in some areas, matters of discretion subject to the abuse of discretion standard.

The party seeking to modify a child support obligation has the burden to provide appropriate and reliable information to support a modification of child support.

Issues are not adequately briefed when an appealing party fails to cite any supporting authority, and this Court will not consider them on appeal.

Kingstone v. Tedrow Kingstone 2025 ND 40
Docket No.: 20240143
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Whether an obligor can control the receipt of trust funds is not relevant to whether the funds are income for child support purposes. A court calculating a parent's child support obligation is concerned with whether the parent receives income from the trust.

The child support amount is presumed to be the correct amount, but can be rebutted by a preponderance of the evidence if it is in the best interest of the children and one of the criteria in N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-09(2) is met. The court must make specific findings demonstrating why the guideline amount has been rebutted.

A court may order the obligor maintain a life insurance policy as reasonable security for child support payments.

A party moving to amend a judgment under Rule 59, N.D.R.Civ.P., bears a heavy burden of showing sufficient grounds for disturbing the final judgment.

State v. McDermott 2025 ND 39
Docket No.: 20240150
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury found the defendant guilty of manslaughter and reckless endangerment with a firearm is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Peterka v. Janda, et al. 2025 ND 38
Docket No.: 20240122
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court judgment denying and dismissing a complaint for declaratory judgment is affirmed.

A district court's findings that an individual lacked capacity to enter into the option to purchase does not preclude a finding that the individual was of unsound mind, rendering the option to purchase voidable under N.D.C.C. § 1401-02. The standard to determine whether an individual lacks capacity to enter into a contract is distinct from the standard whether a contract or other conveyance is voidable under N.D.C.C. § 14-01-02.

Gackle v. NDDOT 2025 ND 37
Docket No.: 20240247
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court judgment affirming an administrative hearing officer's decision to suspend driving privileges for 365 days for driving under the influence of alcohol is reversed.

The North Dakota Department of Transportation fails to show an Intoxilyzer test was fairly administered when an officer's deviation from the approved method was such that the Court cannot say, without expert advice, that the officer's deviation from the approved method did not affect the test results.

When the deviation from the approved method could not have affected the reliability or accuracy of the test results, the deviation does not render the test results inadmissible.

The approved method provides that, upon receiving a result of "Difference Too Great," an "operator shall wait another 20 minutes and ensure the subject has had nothing to eat, drink, or smoke before repeating the Intoxilyzer 8000 test." We interpret "before repeating the Intoxilyzer 8000 test" consistent with the language of the approved method as a whole to require an officer to wait 20 minutes before beginning a subsequent test sequence.

A breath test record showing a period of time less than 20 minutes between test sequences cannot prima facie establish the test was administered in accordance with the approved method because the approved method expressly requires an operator to wait 20 minutes before repeating the test sequence.

Failure to wait 20 minutes before beginning the second testing sequence is the type of deviation from the approved method which may have affected the scientific accuracy or reliability of the test. Absent expert testimony on the likely effect of this deviation, the Department fails to show the test was fairly administered.

Guardianship and Conservatorship of G.I.C. 2025 ND 36
Docket No.: 20240146
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Guardian/Conservator
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court order directing distribution of trust assets is reversed.

When a trust agreement provides for specific devises of land but that land is sold prior to the trust's termination, each beneficiary is entitled to a share of the remaining proceeds of the sale of the land proportionate to the value of each beneficiary's specific devises.

Gravity Oilfield Services v. Valence Natural Gas Solutions 2025 ND 35
Docket No.: 20240184
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court order granting summary judgment and judgment, and award of attorney's fees are reversed.

State v. Gum 2025 ND 34
Docket No.: 20240331
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying a motion for return of seized property is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

Estate of Connolly 2025 ND 33
Docket No.: 20240230
Filing Date: 2/13/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Probate, Wills, Trusts
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

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

Northstar Center v. Lukenbill Family Partnership, et al. 2024 ND 212
Docket No.: 20240034
Filing Date: 1/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

McKenzie Electric Coop., Inc. v. El-Dweek, et al. 1 5.N.W3 d12
Docket No.: 20240275
Filing Date: 1/24/2025
Case Type: Original Proceeding - Civil - Writ of Supervision
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

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.

First National Bank of Omaha v. Yates 2025 ND 23
Docket No.: 20240274
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying a motion for relief from judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1).

State v. Henderson 2025 ND 22
Docket No.: 20240118
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered following a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).

Meiers v. NDDOT 2025 ND 21
Docket No.: 20240215
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Section 39-20-04.1, N.D.C.C., provides the Department with authority to suspend a driver's driving privileges. Section 39-20-03.1(4), N.D.C.C., lists procedures a law enforcement officer must follow when a person has tested over the legal limit for driving under the influence.

An officer's non-compliance with a provision of N.D.C.C. § 39-20-03.1(4) does not impact the Department's authority to suspend a driver's driving privileges unless the provision is basic and mandatory. A provision is basic and mandatory if it mirrors a provision of N.D.C.C. § 39-20-04.1(1).

A provision of N.D.C.C. § 39-20-03.1(4) mirrors a provision of N.D.C.C. § 39-20-04.1(1) when the officer's compliance with the provision provides to the Department information important to the Department in determining its authority to suspend a license.

The requirement in N.D.C.C. § 39-20-03.1(4) that the copy of the checklist and test records of a breath test be "certified" is not a basic and mandatory provision impacting the Department's authority to suspend a driver's driving privileges.

Hillerson v. Baker 2025 ND 20
Docket No.: 20240214
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment, order for contempt, and order for attorney's fees, are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) & (4).

Gooss v. A.K. 2025 ND 19
Docket No.: 20240157
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A disorderly conduct restraining order is affirmed.

Before a court grants a petition for a disorderly conduct restraining order, the court must conduct a full hearing. N.D.C.C. § 12.1-31.2-01(4). The full hearing contemplated by N.D.C.C. § 12.1-31.2-01 is a special summary proceeding, intended to quickly and effectively combat volatile situations before any tragic escalation.

The concern for expeditious proceedings should not override the need to fairly resolve factual disputes. When the court employs a procedure which fails to afford a party a meaningful and reasonable opportunity to present evidence on the relevant issues, the court has abused its discretion and violated the party's due process rights.