Recent Opinions
Disciplinary Board v. Baird 2023 ND 159 Highlight: Lawyer suspended. |
Interest of A.M. 2023 ND 158 Highlight: Order terminating parental rights summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7). |
Interest of A.B. 2023 ND 157 Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4). |
Sayler v. Sayler 2023 ND 156
Highlight: A motion to relocate is not necessary when residential responsibility has not previously been established. Therefore, consideration of the Stout-Hawkinson factors is not necessary when the district court originally determines parental responsibility of parents living in different states. |
State v. Petersen 2023 ND 155
Highlight: Law enforcement exceeds its community caretaking function when it opens the door of a sleeping occupant’s parked semi-truck and steps onto the running boards in an attempt to gather information without first attempting to get a response from outside of the vehicle. |
Estate of Froemke 2023 ND 154
Highlight: A witness must demonstrate some basis for forming an intelligent judgment as to the value of land before offering lay opinion testimony about the value of the land. |
Davis, et al. v. Mercy Medical Center, et al. 2023 ND 153
Highlight: In a negligence action, a proximate cause is a cause which, as a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any controlling intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which it would not have occurred. |
State v. Kollie 2023 ND 152
Highlight: A sidebar addressing routine evidentiary or administrative matters during trial, even without an adequate record, is not a closure implicating the public trial right. |
Wootan v. State 2023 ND 151
Highlight: Once the State moves for summary judgment on a post-conviction application, the defendant must provide evidentiary support for their application in response to the State’s motion. |
Black Elk v. State 2023 ND 150
Highlight: A part must preserve an issue in district court before it can be reviewed on appeal. A party must preserve a claim of error, as it relates to the admissibility of evidence, by objecting or moving to strike the evidence on record and stating a specific ground for exclusion. |