 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bienek v. DOT, No. 20070032,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Suspension of a driver's license in 1990 for DUI was a conviction under N.D. Cent. Code § 39-06.2-10(8) and N.D. Cent. Code § 39-06.2-02(8) because a transportation department was an administrative tribunal, and definition of conviction under N.D. Cent. Code § 39-06-30 was not used; therefore, lifetime suspension of a commercial license was proper.
|
|||||
| Mann v. N.D. Tax Comm'r, No. 20060366,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court properly denied the Native Americans' request for a declaration that the statutory refund process set out in N.D. Cent. Code § 57-43.1-01 et seq., violated due process where the statutory provisions provided meaningful, backward-looking relief with a clear and certain remedy to rectify an alleged unlawful deprivation.
|
|||||
| Mattison v. B.B. (In the Interest of B.B.), No. 20060322,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case where a child was found to be deprived, a juvenile court erred by admitting a social worker's report into evidence as a business record under N.D. R. Evid. 803(6) because some of the statements contained therein constituted hearsay within hearsay; the State did not argue to the trial court that this was a public record.
|
|||||
| McGhee v. Mergenthal, No. 20060268,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in deciding son did not hold a farmstead with an implied trust to allow his sister to reside there, consequently, brother's transfer of the property to his daughter was not in violation of a trust, resulting in any obligation upon daughter under N.D. Cent. Code § 59-01-06(3), court also did not err in denying motion for new trial.
|
|||||
| Noorlun v. State, No. 20070009,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion for post-conviction relief was properly denied because some of the claims raised constituted a misuse of process under N.D. Cent. Code § 29-32.1-12(2) since they could have been brought on direct appeal; claims of ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment and N.D. Const. art. I, § 12 were meritless due to trial strategy.
|
|||||
| Rahn v. State, Nos. 20070022-20070024,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a prisoner's appeal from a district court's order denying his motion under N.D. R. Crim. P. 35 to correct or reduce his sentence was untimely, the North Dakota Supreme Court was without jurisdiction to hear that portion of the prisoner's appeal.
|
|||||
| Roth v. State, No. 20060241,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A nighttime search warrant was supported by probable cause under the Fourth Amendment because an informant stated that petitioner manufactured methamphetamine in his basement, and there was activity in the basement during nighttime hours; those facts indicated that petitioner was likely manufacturing methamphetamine in his home at nighttime.
|
|||||
| Silbernagel v. Silbernagel, No. 20060037,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err under N.D. Cent. Code § 9-06-07 in refusing to permit introduction of parol evidence to clarify parts of settlement agreement in breach of contract action where plaintiffs' attempt to introduce parol evidence that interest was intended to accrue on a $ 150,000 debt would vary and contradict the terms of settlement agreement.
|
|||||
| State v. Edwards, No. 20060254,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order revoking defendant's probation for aggravated assault was overturned and case was remanded for purpose of allowing defendant to make motion to correct illegal sentence under N.D. R. Crim. P. 35(a) where the State conceded that an error was apparently made and that defendant's supervised probation might have expired prior to his resentencing.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
