Justia North Dakota Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Defendants-Appellants Leonard and Ione Smith appealed the denial of their motion for supplemental findings or reconsideration following a trial court's granting of Plaintiff-Appellee Alliance Pipeline's petition to enter their land for examinations and surveys. Alliance entered the Smiths' land to survey for federal approval to construct a natural gas pipeline. Upon review of the matter, the Supreme Court concluded the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the Smiths' motion. View "Alliance Pipeline L.P. v. Smith" on Justia Law

In 2011, Defendant Angela Dieterle was arrested for simple assault. The State alleged she willfully caused bodily injury to another person by biting and striking her husband. She argued on appeal the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of prior bad acts. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "North Dakota v. Dieterle" on Justia Law

Defendants-Appellants Sandra Walker and Joseph Eilers were found liable for damages after breaching employment agreements, and for conspiring to interfere with Plaintiff-Appellee SolarBee, Inc.'s existing business relationships. Finding the trial court's findings of fact were sufficient and that the damages awarded were supported by the evidence, the Supreme Court affirmed damages awards against both Defendants. View "SolarBee, Inc. v. Walker" on Justia Law

Jeffrey Wotzka was a guest at the Radisson Hotel. While taking a shower, he slipped and fell out of the shower. Wotzka sued the Hotel, claiming the Hotel maintained a dangerous condition on its premises by failing to equip the shower with a non-skid strip, a bathmat, or a handrail at the shower level. The Hotel moved for summary judgment, arguing it was under no duty to provide a non-skid strip, a bathmat, or a handrail in its showers. The Hotel also argued it had no duty to warn of the open and obvious dangers of a slippery shower. Wotzka appealed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the Hotel. Upon review, the Supreme Court held that the trial court misapplied the law of this case, and erroneously granted summary judgment because Wotzka raised genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the Radisson Hotel should have anticipated harm despite the obvious or known nature of the danger and failed to maintain the property in a reasonably safe manner. The case was remanded for further proceedings. View "Wotzka v. Minndakota Limited Partnership" on Justia Law

John Holly appealed his conviction on drug charges related to the possession of marijuana and other controlled substances. He argued that the search of his vehicle was not supported by probable cause, and therefore the evidence used to convict him should have been suppressed. Upon review of the trial court record, the Supreme Court concluded that the search of Holly's vehicle was lawful; sufficient evidence existed on the record to sustain a conviction of guilt; and that the trial court did not err in finding, sua sponte, Holly guilty of a lesser-included offense. Therefore, the Court affirmed the criminal judgments which were based on the evidence found in Holly's vehicle. With regard to his residence however, the Court concluded the nighttime search warrant was not supported by separate probable cause, and the evidence found there should have been suppressed. The Court reversed those criminal judgments based on the evidence found in his residence. The case was remanded for the trial court to amend its order denying Holly's motion to suppress and the criminal judgments consistent with the Court's findings. View "North Dakota v. Holly" on Justia Law

The State appealed a district court order that dismissed felony theft of property charges against Steven Goldmann for lack of probable cause. After review of the trial court record, the Supreme Court concluded the State produced evidence to establish probable cause for a class B felony theft and the district court erred in its theft valuation. Accordingly, the Court reversed and remanded the case. View "North Dakota v. Goldmann" on Justia Law

Matthew Eagleman appealed an order that granted the State's motion to correct an illegal sentence and which resentenced him to imprisonment. Because the district court acted within the statutorily prescribed sentencing limits and did not rely on an impermissible factor in resentencing Eagleman, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "North Dakota v. Eagleman" on Justia Law

Caryn Sall (Weber) appealed a district court order that denied her motion for relief from a fourth amended divorce judgment and a district court order on remand from her 2011 appeal to the Supreme Court. Concluding its judgment on remand was complied with and the district court correctly denied attempts to redetermine previously resolved issues, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Sall v. Sall" on Justia Law

The North Dakota Department of Transportation appealed the reversal of its hearing officer's decision to suspend Debbie Ann Painte's driving privileges for 180 days. Upon review of the matter, the Supreme Court concluded the district court erred in deciding the hearing officer made insufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law to establish the police officer had reasonable grounds to believe Painte was in actual physical control of a vehicle. Furthermore, the Court concluded the Department laid a proper foundation for the admission of Painte's chemical test for intoxication. The district court's judgment was reversed and the hearing officer's decision suspending Painte's driving privileges was reinstated. View "Painte v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation" on Justia Law

The North Dakota Department of Transportation appealed a district court judgment that reversed its administrative hearing officer's decision to suspend Jay Olson's driving privileges for 180 days for driving under the influence of alcohol. Upon review of the matter, the Supreme Court concluded reasonable minds could have concluded the hearing officer's finding that Olson did not have anything to eat, drink, or smoke during the twenty minutes before the Intoxilyzer test was supported by the weight of the evidence in the record. The Court therefore reversed the district court's judgment which found differently, and reinstated the administrative suspension of Olson's driving privileges. View "Olson v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation" on Justia Law