 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Bates v. State, No. 20050321,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| D.D. v. Dir., Cass County Soc. Servs., Nos. 20050176, Nos. 20050177,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court properly terminated a mother's parental rights, N.D. Cent. Code § 27-20-44, where she voluntary associated with the father (against whom there had been no-contact orders), she exposed her children to domestic violence, she failed to follow through with treatment, and she continued abuse of alcohol.
|
|||||
| Disciplinary Bd. v. Giese (In re Giese), No. 20050158,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an attorney disciplinary matter, an attorney violated N.D. R. Lawyer Disc. 6.3 by failing to notify his clients that he was suspended from practicing law. Further, he violated N.D. R. Prof. Conduct 8.1 by stating that he had complied with Rule 6.3. He also violated the disciplinary rules by holding himself out as licensed to practice.
|
|||||
| Dunn v. State, No. 20050336,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not err by granting the State's motion to dismiss defendant's motion for post-coviction relief on the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel where he failed to supply any competent evidence showing an issue of material fact under N.D. Cent. Code § 29-32.1-09(1).
|
|||||
| Edward H. Schwartz Constr., Inc. v. Driessen, No. 20050150,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court had not erroneously applied N.D. Cent. Code § 9-02-20 when it found subcontractor had not conditioned acceptance of his oral quote for a project on the contractor's securing of a gravel pit for the aggregate and nor was it error for the court to have found subcontractor had orally contracted to provide aggregate for $ 2 per cubic yard.
|
|||||
| Feland v. B.V. (In re B.V.), No. 20050300,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court ordered respondent, an accused sexually dangerous person as defined by N.D. Cent. Code § 25-03.3-01(8), committed. District court did not err in not holding hearing within 60 days because delays were caused by respondent, and district court did not err in denying request for change of counsel because of apparent delay tactic.
|
|||||
| Hewson v. Hewson, No. 20050218,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While a trial court properly found that husband owed wife money to correct an unequal asset distribution resulting from parties' divorce, trial court failed to clearly state that determined amount was credit to wife for any child support she might have owed husband. The trial court also failed to make specific findings of how it arrived at amount.
|
|||||
| Hilgers v. Hilgers, No. 20050146,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Supreme Court of North Dakota concluded N.D. R. Civ. P. 63 did not apply where a hearing had not commenced when the new judge was assigned the case after the previous judge retired; the new judge had conducted the evidentiary hearing in the child and spousal support case, and thus, he was not required to make a certification under Rule 63.
|
|||||
| Korynta v. Korynta, No. 20050201,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In divorce and child support matter, trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that shuttling children between two homes would not be in children's best interests; however, trial court erred in extrapolating husband's income because it failed to properly apply child support guidelines, pursuant to N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-02.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
