 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ballensky v. Flattum-Riemers, No. 20050277,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, June 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case where a physician disclosed information regarding a patient's positive drug test to law enforcement after a car accident, summary judgment was improperly granted to the physician because there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the physician was acting in good faith under N.D. Cent. Code § 43-17-41 (1993).
|
|||||
| Hickle v. E.G. (In the Interest of E.G.), Nos. 20050447-20050448,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, June 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a mother failed to adequately supervise or discipline two special needs children and did not ensure that they took their medication, her parental rights were terminated under N.D. Cent. Code § 27-20-44(1)(b) because she showed no real improvement in her parenting skills, and the children's behavior deteriorated due to contact with the mother.
|
|||||
| State v. Manning, No. 20050327,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, June 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit two exhibits, pursuant to N.D. R. Evid. 403, in defendant's trial for disobedience of a judicial order because the exhibits were not relevant, pursuant to N.D. R. Evid. 402, and exhibits would have misled jury; however, trial court did allow exhibits related to defendant's defense.
|
|||||
| Tarnavsky v. Tarnavsky, No. 20050457,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, June 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant sought review of the order confirming a sheriff's sale of his property to his brother to satisfy a judgment, his brother filed one-page brief acknowledging errors in the sheriff's sale process. He consented to a remand of the case with the instruction that the order confirming the sale be vacated.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
