Tarnavsky v. Tarnavsky, 806 N.W.2d 438 (N.D. 2011). · Go Syfert
Search
Tarnavsky v. Tarnavsky, 806 N.W.2d 438 (N.D. 2011). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
36 citation events (36 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Williston v. Solberg (In Re Estate) (nd, 2018-05-08)
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2011 2018 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Williston v. Solberg (In Re Estate)
N.D. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
See Tarnavsky v. Tschider , 2011 ND 207 , ¶ 2, 806 N.W.2d 438 ; Tarnavsky v. Rankin , 2010 ND 77 , ¶ 2, 789 N.W.2d 731 .
cited Cited "see" State v. Chase
N.D. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Holkesvig v. Moore , 2011 ND 199 , 806 N.W.2d 438 . [¶2] Gerald W.
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Quilt
N.D. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Everett v. State , 2011 ND 221 , 806 N.W.2d 438 ; Everett v. State , 2010 ND 226 , 795 N.W.2d 37 ; Everett v. State , 2010 ND 4 , 789 N.W.2d 282 ; Everett v. State , 2008 ND 199 , 757 N.W.2d 530 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Tarnavsky
v.
Tarnavsky
20100407.
North Dakota Supreme Court.
Oct 18, 2011.
806 N.W.2d 438
Cited by 26 opinions  |  Published

Filed 10/18/11 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2011 ND 199

Randy Holkesvig, Plaintiff and Appellant

v.

Christine Moore, Defendant and Appellee

No. 20110007

Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Joel D. Medd, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Randy Holkesvig, self-represented, P.O. Box 82, Fargo, N.D. 58107-0082.

Shannon Peter Uglem, P.O. Box 589, Northwood, N.D. 58267-0589, for defendant and appellee.

Holkesvig v. Moore

No. 20110007

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Randy Holkesvig appealed from a district court summary judgment dismissing his action against Christine Moore for libel and slander and awarding Moore attorney fees under N.D.C.C. § 28-26-01(2).  Holkesvig argues: (1) the district court erred in  granting summary judgment; (2) the district court was biased against him; (3) his due process rights were violated; and (4) Moore was not entitled to an award of attorney fees.  We affirm the judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom