 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Balerud (In re Balerud), No. 20060165,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was suspended from the practice of law in the State of North Dakota for six months and one day, because the attorney did not present any evidence that his medical condition caused or contributed to his professional misconduct.
|
|||||
| Frisk v. Frisk, No. 20050391,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Amended domestic violence protection order entered against the husband was affirmed because the district court made sufficient findings of actual or imminent domestic violence to support the amended order under N.D. Cent. Code § 14-07.1-02, as the husband continued "harassment" type behavior and "taunting" behavior toward the wife.
|
|||||
| Dahl v. Messmer, No. 20050426,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Partial summary judgment was properly granted to seller as buyers did not present clear evidence that management contract did not reflect parties' intent, nor could parol evidence establish misrepresentation by seller. Buyers presented no evidence showing sellers's statements amount to fraud or deceit under N.D. Cent. Code §§ 9-03-08 or 9-10-02.
|
|||||
| Ramsey Fin. Corp. v. Haugland, No. 20050375,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Shareholders did not comply with procedure for asserting dissenters' rights under N.D. Cent. Code § 10-19.1-88 and were not entitled to court determination of fair value of shares plus interest, but were entitled to the amount offered, which was $134.25 per share. Shareholders had no other remedy available to receive fair value of preferred shares.
|
|||||
| Deacon's Dev., LLP v. Lamb, No. 20050147,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred when it awarded attorney's fees to property owner after finding that the owner had properly terminated and cancelled a contract for deed because positions asserted by purchasers prior to litigation were not "claims for relief;" thus, the trial court did not have authority to award attorney fees under N.D. Cent. Code § 28-26-01(2).
|
|||||
| Dvorak v. Dvorak, No. 20050405,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a former wife was unable to show any non-economic advantages to minor children residing in New Mexico after she finished her education there, and the purpose of the relocation was to frustrate a former husband's visitation, a district court did not err by denying the request under N.D. Cent. Code § 14-09-07.
|
|||||
| State v. Bjerklie, No. 20050438,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was charged with theft of services, court's order granting State's motion in limine precluding defendant from providing alternative values for the body shop's services was in error because it removed that determination from the jury and deprived defendant of opportunity to prove that lesser amount for the services was correct value.
|
|||||
| State v. Campbell, No. 20050326, Nos. 20050337 & 20050338,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants' rights to confrontation under U.S. Const. amend. VI were not violated by admission of a state crime laboratory report on the ground that the report was a testimonial statement under the holding of Crawford because under N.D. Cent. Code § 19-03.1-37(5), defendants could have subpoenaed the laboratory report's author but failed to do so.
|
|||||
| State v. Salveson, Nos. 20060015 and 20060016,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant to two consecutive one-year sentences with three months suspended for committing two class A misdemeanors; pursuant to N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-32-11(3), the crimes of DUI and aggravated reckless driving constituted substantially different criminal objectives.
|
|||||
| Weinreis v. Hill, No. 20060026,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, July 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under N.D. Cent. Code § 3-03-03, airplane lessee was not bound by its partner's actions in holding himself out as its president and entering sale-lease back transaction because leasing company acted negligently; there were problems with the documentation it received and it paid all consideration for plane to partner and not to partnership entity.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
