 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Holden v. Holden, No. 20060212,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Property distribution by trial court in divorce action was not clearly erroneous where it properly applied Ruff-Fischer guidelines, resulting in roughly equal distribution of marital property, as required by N.D. Cent. Code § 14-05-24(1); trial court carefully explained that award was not exactly equal due to husband's noncompliance with discovery.
|
|||||
| McCrothers Corp. v. City of Mandan, No. 20060127,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: City ordinances prohibiting business that served alcohol from providing adult entertainment did not violate the bars' First Amendment rights because, inter alia, the ordinances did not completely eliminate adult entertainment and the ordinances were aimed at combating negative secondary effects caused by audit entertainment establishments.
|
|||||
| Rothberg v. Rothberg, No. 20060191,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The order denying the husband's motion to modify his stipulated spousal support obligation under a divorce judgment was affirmed because although the husband's financial circumstances had changed, it was not a material change because he continued to have the ability to meet his stipulated spousal support obligation.
|
|||||
| State v. Austin, No. 20060022, No. 20060194,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in excluding testimony of defendant's expert, a psychologist, in his trial for gross sexual imposition under N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-20-03(2)(a) for engaging in sexual contact with his former girlfriend's niece who was under 15 as fact that testing showed defendant did not have sexual interest in children was irrelevant to charges.
|
|||||
| State v. Duchene, No. 20060164,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The district court's determination that police officers' reliance on a search warrant of defendant's apartment was objectively reasonable and that the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied was controlling, where defendant failed to challenge the district court's ruling that the good faith exception applied.
|
|||||
| State v. Fischer, No. 20060153,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court abused its discretion in denying defendant's pro se motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal under N.D. R. App. P. 4(b)(4) because if defendant mailed his notice of appeal to the trial clerk, as he claimed, but notice was lost in the mail, that was good cause for granting extension based on circumstances beyond his control.
|
|||||
| State v. Streeper, No. 20060162,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A jury could have reasonably concluded that manslaughter defendant, who injected victim with a syringe, was familiar with drug overdose symptoms and was awake while victim was in a medical crisis. Whether defendant's conduct in failing to render aid rose to the level of criminal negligence or recklessness was within the province of the jury.
|
|||||
| Stockman Bank v. AGSCO, Inc., No. 20060119,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment dismissing the seed supplier's claim to proceeds from the farm's crop was reversed and remanded because the supplier substantially complied with the requirements for an agricultural supplier's lien under N.D. Cent. Code § 35-31-02, as the farm had actual knowledge that a lien could be filed if it did not pay the supplier.
|
|||||
| Stockman Bank v. AGSCO, Inc., No. 20060174,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, February 28, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dispute involving agricultural supplier's liens, N.D. Cent. Code § 35-31-02 contemplated liens on crops grown in North Dakota; therefore, a remand was necessary for a determination of which supplies were used on Montana crops and which supplies were used on North Dakota crops.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
