New Opinions: Jan. 23
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.
Davis, et al. v. Romanyshyn 2025 ND 18
Docket No.: 20240167
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Jensen, Jon J.
Highlight: A disorderly conduct restraining order may not be granted without a full evidentiary hearing. It is better practice for a petitioner to present evidence through testimony, rather than through an inadmissible affidavit and petition. The respondent shall have an opportunity to contest the restraining order by offering admissible evidence or through cross-examination.
A disorderly conduct restraining order must not conflict with a parental responsibility order.
State v. Ruot 2025 ND 17
Docket No.: 20240193
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Child Abuse/Child Neglect
Author: Per Curiam
Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted the defendant of child abuse is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).
State v. Jackson 2025 ND 16
Docket No.: 20240234
Filing Date: 1/23/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
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).
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
