William L. Paulson

The case involved an appeal by the City of Casselton and related local entities from a North Dakota Public Service Commission order requiring upgrades to three railroad crossings and closure of a fourth in Casselton due to safety concerns from increased coal traffic. The district court dismissed the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court affirmed. The court held that under N.D.C.C. § 28-32-15, appeals from PSC orders must be taken to the district court of the county where the hearing occurred, which was Cass County rather than Burleigh County. The court also noted potential untimeliness in filing but did not reach that issue or others because jurisdiction was lacking.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

This case involved a dispute over payment for window repairs performed by plaintiff Gerald Meier on defendant Vivian Novak's house, which had been damaged in a hailstorm; after the roofing contractor failed to pay Meier and became insolvent, Meier sued Novak for the $63.64 bill based on alleged promises to pay and agency principles. Novak counterclaimed for slander arising from a public confrontation in which Meier called him an "asshole" while demanding payment. The district court awarded Meier the amount claimed and dismissed the counterclaim, and the Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that the facts supported liability under ratification of agency and that the statement was not slander per se under state law because it did not impute a disqualifying characteristic and no special damages were alleged or proved.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved an appeal from a summary judgment in a dispute over an option contract to purchase real property granted in 1976 by Alex Generous to the Wessels brothers. After Generous's death, the estate's personal representative repudiated the option, and the Wesselses attempted to exercise it through letters offering to buy the land at appraised or proposed prices, but without following the option's specified procedures for selecting appraisers or entering a contract for deed. The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed the denial of specific performance, holding that the option was never properly exercised because the Wesselses failed to comply with its terms for determining fair market value and tendering payment or a contract. The court found no genuine issue of material fact regarding the improper exercise of the option rights.

propertyprocedure

This case is an appeal by Richard Skjonsby from the summary dismissal of his application for post-conviction relief following his convictions for murder and attempted murder in a 1980 shooting incident. Skjonsby alleged ineffective assistance of counsel based on claims that his attorneys suborned perjured testimony, that his physical, mental, and emotional condition plus medications rendered him unable to assist in his defense, and that a psychiatric examination was invalid. The North Dakota Supreme Court reversed the district court's dismissal, ruling that the allegations raised material issues of fact under the Uniform Post-Conviction Procedure Act that required a full evidentiary hearing rather than disposition on the pleadings and record alone.

criminal lawprocedure

Linda Johnson sued her former employer Northwestern Bell Telephone Company after being denied job reinstatement following an extended child care leave taken after the birth of her child in 1979. Johnson had relied on employer-provided summaries and supervisor statements indicating up to 12 months of leave with guaranteed reinstatement, but the union contract limited guaranteed reinstatement to six months, and no positions were available when she sought to return after seven months. The trial court dismissed her contract claim but submitted estoppel and failure-to-make-reasonable-efforts theories to the jury, which awarded $45,000 in compensatory damages and $15,000 in punitive damages. On appeal the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the compensatory award, holding that sufficient evidence supported liability on the submitted theories and that evidentiary rulings were not prejudicial, but reversed the punitive damages because they are unavailable in a pure contract action absent an independent tort.

labor & employmentproceduretorts & liability

This case involves an appeal by the State of North Dakota from a district court order suppressing evidence obtained during a search of defendant Russell Metzner's residence. Metzner had been arrested and charged with felony possession of marijuana after officers executing a federal search warrant for a firearm and related documents discovered the drugs. The warrant was based on an affidavit detailing how Metzner, a convicted felon, had been identified as the purchaser of a rifle using a false name. The North Dakota Supreme Court reversed the suppression order, holding that the affidavit provided sufficient facts and permissible inferences for a magistrate to find probable cause that the rifle would be located at Metzner's home.

criminal lawprocedureguns

The case involved Palmer Aasmundstad, a long-time employee at Dickinson State College, who sued the college after it refused to pay him for approximately 40 days of accumulated annual leave upon his retirement in 1980, instead directing him to use the leave before his contract ended on June 30. Aasmundstad had notified the college of his retirement plans in 1979; the college later ordered him to take the leave or forfeit payment, and after he continued working until ordered out in May 1980, he received no payout despite remaining available. The trial court dismissed the complaint, concluding that the employment contract (which incorporated college policies) controlled and that Aasmundstad had not proven entitlement to payment under contract law. The North Dakota Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the contract language on annual leave was ambiguous regarding the employer's ability to require use of leave versus payout, that findings on intent, custom, and usage were lacking or inadequate, and that the trial court's conclusion did not comply with procedural requirements for findings of fact.

labor & employmentprocedure

Martha Sacchini, a library science instructor at Dickinson State College, sued after the college offered her only a half-time tenured position for 1980-1981 instead of full-time employment, which she refused, resulting in the hiring of a replacement and the end of her annual contracts. Each of her prior contracts from 1974 onward contained special typewritten provisions labeling them terminal and conditioning future employment on enrollment trends. The trial court dismissed her complaint, and the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the contracts were governed solely by contract law under which the specific handwritten terms controlled over general tenure policies in the faculty handbook, that Sacchini had no contractual right to full-time tenured employment, and that she received appropriate notice regarding the part-time offer tied to enrollment concerns.

labor & employment

This case involves Regina Fleck's appeal from a Burleigh County District Court order denying her motion to vacate a 1981 divorce judgment under North Dakota Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The underlying divorce included a property settlement agreement in which Regina received the right to live in the marital home for up to ten years (or until remarriage or cohabitation), after which the home would be sold and equity divided equally; Mike received various vehicles and accounts. Regina argued the judgment should be set aside due to mistake, inadequate findings under Rule 52(a), and related grounds after Mike sought to enforce the sale provision following her remarriage. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that Regina did not meet her burden to show grounds for relief and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in upholding the voluntary agreement that she signed without independent counsel despite being advised to obtain one.

family lawpropertyprocedure

The case involved the conviction of Joseph Lesley Brown for felonious restraint in North Dakota, where the key evidence came from the complaining witness whose memory of the assault had been refreshed through hypnosis sessions conducted by police. Brown appealed, arguing that the witness should have been deemed incompetent to testify due to the hypnosis. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that hypnosis does not render a witness incompetent but instead affects only the credibility and weight of the testimony, which is a matter for the jury to evaluate. The court reasoned that a per se rule of inadmissibility would be overly restrictive, could impair the rights of both prosecution and defense, and that safeguards like cross-examination and jury instructions on hypnosis's effects were sufficient to address reliability concerns.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned a contract for deed for three lots and a building in North Dakota, under which buyers Magnusson and Metzger agreed to pay the Williamsons $16,500 plus interest by June 1982 but defaulted after an unauthorized demolition of the building. The Williamsons sued for specific performance of the contract. The North Dakota Supreme Court reversed the district court's grant of specific performance and remanded for an award of damages, holding that the sellers had not met their burden to show that monetary damages were inadequate and that an attorney's unauthorized notice of cancellation did not bar the action.

propertyprocedure

This case involves divorced parents Lynette and Dale Lapp disputing custody of their ten-year-old daughter Trina under an existing divided custody order granting each parent alternating six-month periods. Lynette moved to modify the order for sole custody, citing alleged changes in circumstances including Dale's cohabitation with a non-married woman during his custody time, lack of parental cooperation, and other incidents. The trial court denied the motion after finding the child was happy, well-adjusted, and not adversely affected, with the same judge who handled the original divorce. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed, applying the standard that modification requires a significant change in circumstances serving the child's best interests, concluding the record supported no such change warranting alteration and distinguishing precedents where cohabitation or relationships alone did not mandate transfer without evidence of harm.

family law

In State v. Hartleib, the defendant was charged with driving under the influence and reckless driving after an incident in which his vehicle was observed swerving on a highway, forced another car into a ditch during a passing attempt, turned around in the oncoming lane, and collided with the other vehicle. The trial court acquitted him of DUI but convicted him of reckless driving under N.D.C.C. § 39-08-03 and imposed a suspended jail sentence, fine, and other penalties. Hartleib appealed, contending that the evidence was insufficient and that review should be limited to the specific reasons stated in the trial court's letter opinion. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, ruling that substantial evidence in the full record showed reckless driving in disregard of others' safety and that criminal appeals permit examination of the entire record to assess sufficiency beyond a reasonable doubt rather than being confined to the trial judge's stated findings.

criminal law

The case involved JoAnn Perske's appeal from a Job Service decision denying her unemployment benefits after her discharge as a dental assistant for alleged misconduct, including repeated tardiness, incorrect time cards, and unexcused absences. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that a preponderance of the evidence supported the finding of misconduct under N.D.C.C. § 52-06-02(2), which disqualifies claimants discharged for willful or wanton disregard of an employer's interests. The court applied the Boynton Cab definition of misconduct, reviewed the administrative record under the limited scope of N.D.C.C. § 28-32-19, and rejected arguments that a prior warning was required or that the employer was estopped by prior tolerance of the conduct.

labor & employment

This case involved Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association foreclosing on a mortgage after borrowers Albert and Sharon Kouba defaulted on monthly payments for a home loan originated in 1975. The Koubas offered partial and non-guaranteed payments that the lender rejected, leading to the foreclosure action filed in 1982; they raised defenses including challenges to jurisdiction over the federally chartered lender, demands for a jury trial, and arguments that the loan lacked valid consideration or lawful money. The trial court granted summary judgment to Midwest Federal, striking portions of the answer and counterclaim, and the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed, holding that mortgage foreclosure is an equitable proceeding with no right to a jury trial, that the lender properly refused insufficient tenders, and that various other legal defenses lacked merit as questions of law. The court also confirmed that federal reserve notes constitute legal tender and that the note and mortgage were presumptively supported by consideration.

propertyprocedurebusiness & regulatory

This case concerns a dispute over ownership of a 50% interest in oil, gas, and minerals beneath 160 acres in Stark County, North Dakota, stemming from a 1950 warranty deed that omitted a mineral reservation allegedly intended in the parties' contract for deed. The Wehners sued in 1981 to reform the deed based on mutual mistake and to quiet title, while the Tormaschys counterclaimed to quiet title in their favor as subsequent purchasers. The trial court dismissed the complaint, finding the claim barred by statutes of limitation and by N.D.C.C. § 32-04-17, which protects third parties who acquire rights in good faith and for value, and quieted title in the Tormaschys. The Supreme Court of North Dakota reversed and remanded, holding that the action was not time-barred under Ell v. Ell because the mistake was not discovered until 1978, that § 32-04-17 did not necessarily preclude reformation, and that the trial court had failed to address whether a mutual mistake occurred or whether estoppel or laches applied.

propertyprocedure

This case involves a dispute over repayment of a $36,000 loan that John Hilzendager made to Holiday Leasing & Investment, Inc. in 1972, secured by a corporate debenture bond. The district court found both Holiday Leasing and its related corporation Holiday Air liable to Hilzendager and also held the individual officers and directors jointly and severally liable to the corporations for the debt amount. On appeal, the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the corporations' direct liability to the plaintiff but reversed the judgment imposing personal liability on the individuals to the corporations; it remanded for a new judgment making the individuals (except Oldenburg) jointly and severally liable directly to Hilzendager based on their disregard of corporate formalities and other facts in the record.

business & regulatory

In State v. Fridley, the defendant appealed his conviction for driving while his license was revoked under North Dakota law after being stopped for speeding; he sought to present evidence and a jury instruction supporting a mistake-of-law defense based on a telephone conversation with an employee at the Drivers License Division regarding procedures for a work permit. The trial court granted the state's motion in limine to exclude references to post-revocation contacts with the Division and refused the requested instruction on excuse due to reliance on an official interpretation. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the statutory mistake-of-law defense does not apply as a matter of law to prosecutions for this strict-liability traffic offense, that the proffered statements did not qualify as an official interpretation or admissible non-hearsay, and that there was no showing of reasonable reliance. The court noted that similar defenses have been rejected in most other jurisdictions for such offenses.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a dispute between Jeffrey Voltz and James Dudgeon over the operation of a Kenworth truck under the name Voltz Trucking, after Voltz had hired Dudgeon to haul grain and they jointly purchased the second truck. Voltz sued Dudgeon alleging a partnership or joint venture existed and seeking reimbursement for half of various business expenses, an unauthorized $500 loan to a third party, and amounts Dudgeon allegedly received above his compensation. The district court found a joint venture between the parties and held Dudgeon liable for half of certain maintenance and contract costs, the unauthorized loan, and $255 in overcompensation, entering judgment for Voltz in the amount of $1,333.29. The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the record supported the existence of a joint venture based on the parties' combined contributions, joint control, and profit-sharing arrangement regarding the truck, that the loan was unauthorized and outside the venture's scope, and that the finding of overcompensation was not clearly erroneous.

business & regulatory

The case concerned sellers who sought specific performance of a 1977 contract for deed on Bismarck property after successive transfers of the buyers' interests and a default on monthly payments that followed the city's condemnation of the building in 1979. The sellers had earlier invoked a contractual clause demanding full payment within twelve months, but they did not declare a default or pursue the contract's separate default remedies before filing suit for the remaining balance. The district court dismissed the action, concluding that the sellers failed to demonstrate why damages would be an inadequate legal remedy and citing additional considerations under North Dakota's antideficiency statutes and redemption policy. The Supreme Court affirmed on the ground that specific performance requires proof of inadequate legal remedies, which was not shown here.

property