 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Eckroth v. B.L.S. (In the Interest of B.L.S.), No. 20060234,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, October 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because additional medications ordered by the district court were not certified by an independent physician as required by N.D. Cent. Code § 25-03.1-18.1(1)(a), the inmate's statutory rights were violated as to those medications, and the order authorizing the use of additional medication was reversed.
|
|||||
| Hild v. Johnson, No. 20060056,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, October 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In landowners' quiet title action, the trial court did not err in quieting title of the mineral interests under a river in the mineral owners as a mineral deed by the parties' predecessors in interest conveyed to the mineral owners an undivided interest in the minerals in all the land in question, including that portion underlying the river.
|
|||||
| Kolrud v. Thomas (In re Thomas), No. 20050370,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, October 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion in appointing nephew as his aunt's guardian and conservator under N.D. Cent. Code §§ 30.1-28-11(4), 30.1-29-10(4) because it found that the nephew had no ownership or beneficiary interest in his aunt's estate, would not accept any of her assets, and would waive his right to compensation if appointed.
|
|||||
| Hasper v. Ctr. Mut. Ins. Co., No. 20050316,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, October 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A UIM insurer had to demonstrate actual prejudice from a lack of prior notice of a settlement and release with alleged tortfeasors under N.D. Cent. Code § 26.1-40-15.6(7), and since the district court effectively read the requirement of an adverse effect out of the statute and applied the wrong legal standard, summary judgment was inappropriate.
|
|||||
| Rojas v. Workforce Safety & Ins., No. 20060087,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, October 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in affirming Workforce Safety and Insurance decision to only pay claimant $ 9,876 for costs and attorney's fees for his winning appeal and holding that that was maximum amount it could pay under N.D. Cent. Code §§ 65-02-08 and 65-10-03 fee cap; N.D. Cent. Code § 28-32-50, general attorney fee provision for administrative cases, applied.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
