16 North Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1916–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Dakota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co.green2 sentences2016Id. at 322-23 , 128 S.Ct. 2709 . [¶ 9] In ruling the tribal court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the discrimination claim, the Supreme Court noted the general rule restricting tribal authority over nonmember activities is “particularly strong” when the nonmember activity occurs on land owned in fee simple by non-Indians and explained: Our cases have made clear that once tribal land is converted into fee simple, the tribe loses plenary jurisdiction over it. 2016Id. at 322-23 , 128 S.Ct. 2709 . [¶ 9] In ruling the tribal court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the discrimination claim, the Supreme Court noted the general rule restricting tribal authority over nonmember activities is “particularly strong” when the nonmember activity occurs on land owned in fee simple by non-Indians and explained: Our cases have made clear that once tribal land is converted into fee simple, the tribe loses plenary jurisdiction over it. | 1 | 2 |
Thiele v. Security State Bank of New Salemgreen1 sentence1993The court entered judgment against the Osters jointly and severally for $106,570.24, the amount of the notes with accrued unpaid interest, plus additional interest at the daily rate of $30.38. 1 Randy Oster appealed. 2 We have previously set forth the relevant procedural framework governing summary judgment in Thiele v. Security State Bank of New Salem, 396 N.W.2d 295, 297 (N.D.1986) (citations omitted): “Summary judgment is a procedural device available for the prompt and expeditious disposition of a controversy without a trial if there is no dispute as to either the material facts or the inf | 1 | 1 |
Okken v. Okkengreen2 sentences1992Denial of motion for j.n.o.v. or new trial The Bank contends that the trial court abused its discretion and erred in denying the Bank’s motion for judgment of dismissal notwithstanding the verdict or in the alternative for a new trial. “[I]n determining if judgment n.o.v. should be granted, the trial court must employ a rigorous standard with a view toward preserving verdicts.” Okken v. Okken, 325 N.W.2d 264, 267 (N.D.1982). 1992“The test is whether or not the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made, leads to but one conclusion as to the verdict about which there can be no reasonable difference of opinion.” Id. | 1 | 1 |
American State Bank of Killdeer v. Hewsongreen1 sentence1988Inasmuch as an owner of property is fully competent to testify as to its value [American State Bank of Killdeer v. Hewson, 411 N.W.2d 57, 64 (N.D.1987)], and because the Bank has presented no evidence to rebut this assertion of commercial unreasonableness or to establish that either C.J.’s or Grinde *819 ever received notice of disposition of the collateral, we conclude that genuine issues of material fact exist which precluded the granting of summary judgment. | 1 | 1 |
Matter of Estate of Nelsongreen1 sentence1987Section 28-26-31, unlike Section 28-26-01(2), does not contain discretionary language, but directs the court to award the payment of all expenses, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, to the party having to respond to “[ajllegations and denials in any pleadings in court, made without reasonable cause and not in good faith, and found to be untrue.” In Matter of Estate of Nelson, 281 N.W.2d 245, 250 (N.D.1979), we determined that under Section 28-26-31, adverse decisions do not, per se, entitle the prevailing party to an award of attorney's fees. | 1 | 1 |
Anderson v. Krohgreen1 sentence1983See Anderson v. Kroh, 301 N.W.2d 359, 364 (N.D. 1981). [6] The authorization is included in the statement: "In case the motion for a new trial has been conditionally denied, the appellee on appeal may assert error in that denial ...." Rule 50(c)(1), NDRCivP. [7] See 9 Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2531). [8] Although the note sued on is not due until June 20, 1985, it contains an acceleration clause applicable when an installment payment is missed. | 1 | 1 |
Weidner v. Engelhartgreen1 sentence1982In Weidner v. Engelhardt, 176 N.W.2d 509, 520 (N.D.1970), we *296 said that although “a court should be cautious in granting a motion for summary judgment where the facts in issue are peculiarly in the knowledge of the moving party, we also realize that a certain burden is upon the opponent in summary-judgment proceedings to attempt to obtain information of value to the court by the use of discovery proceedings provided by our rules of civil procedure." [Emphasis added.] The trial court granted the Bank’s motion for summary judgment based upon the record of the case, concluding that there was | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Vorachek v. Citizens State Bank of Lankin
green
2 sentences1995Timmerman Leasing, supra, 525 N.W.2d at 664 ; Friedt, supra, 459 N.W.2d at 242 ; Vorachek, supra, 421 N.W.2d at 52-53 . 1995Timmerman Leasing, supra, 525 N.W.2d at 664 ; Friedt, supra, 459 N.W.2d at 242 ; Vorachek, supra, 421 N.W.2d at 52-53 . | 2 | 1989–1995 |
Timmerman Leasing, Inc. v. Christianson
green
1 sentence1995Timmerman Leasing, supra, 525 N.W.2d at 664 ; Friedt, supra, 459 N.W.2d at 242 ; Vorachek, supra, 421 N.W.2d at 52-53 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Friedt v. Moseanko
green
2 sentences1995Timmerman Leasing, supra, 525 N.W.2d at 664 ; Friedt, supra, 459 N.W.2d at 242 ; Vorachek, supra, 421 N.W.2d at 52-53 . 1995Timmerman Leasing, supra, 525 N.W.2d at 664 ; Friedt, supra, 459 N.W.2d at 242 ; Vorachek, supra, 421 N.W.2d at 52-53 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Honn v. National Computer Systems, Inc.
green
1 sentence1995Applying law explained in Honn v. National Computer Systems, Inc., 311 N.W.2d 1 (Minn.1981), the trial court determined the period of limitations does not automatically begin for all of the debt when a debtor’s default on a few installments gives the creditor the option to accelerate the entire debt. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Williams v. State
green
2 sentences1993Attorney Bye represented Judge Eckert, who was one of 20 named defendants in Williams v. State, 405 N.W.2d 615 (N.D.1987). 1993Attorney Bye represented Judge Eckert, who was one of 20 named defendants in Williams v. State, 405 N.W.2d 615 (N.D.1987). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Neuner v. Ballantyne
green
1 sentence1989Failure to file a brief by the adverse party is an admission that, in the opinion of counsel, the motion is meritorious." (Emphasis added.) See also Vorachek v. Citizens State Bank of Lankin, 421 N.W.2d 45 (N.D.1988); Neuner v. Ballantyne, supra. The failure of Elsberry to submit an answer brief to First American Bank’s motion for summary judgment operated as an admission that there was no an oral agreement to refinance between Elsberry and First American Bank. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Croak v. Witteman
neutral
2 sentences1989Although the "continuing viability" of the "consistent with the record title position" has been questioned, The Unreliable Record Title, 60 N.D.L.Rev. 203, 217 (1984), we do not address that issue because of our disposition of this case on other grounds. [3] In Croak v. Witteman, 73 N.D. 592 , 17 N.W.2d 542 (1945), a deed recited $1.00 as consideration. 1989Although the "continuing viability" of the "consistent with the record title position" has been questioned, The Unreliable Record Title, 60 N.D.L.Rev. 203, 217 (1984), we do not address that issue because of our disposition of this case on other grounds. [3] In Croak v. Witteman, 73 N.D. 592 , 17 N.W.2d 542 (1945), a deed recited $1.00 as consideration. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
STATE BANK OF BURLEIGH CTY. TRUST v. Patten
green
1 sentence1986Bjorgen cited H & F Hogs v. Huwe, 368 N.W.2d 553 (N.D.1985) and State Bank of Burleigh County Trust v. Patten, 357 N.W.2d 239 (N.D.1984) as supportive authority for his argument. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
H & F HOGS v. Huwe
green
1 sentence1986Bjorgen cited H & F Hogs v. Huwe, 368 N.W.2d 553 (N.D.1985) and State Bank of Burleigh County Trust v. Patten, 357 N.W.2d 239 (N.D.1984) as supportive authority for his argument. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Davis Sewing MacHine Co. v. Richards
green
2 sentences1973In 38 Am.Jur.2d, Guaranty § 37, page 1035, we find the following language: “A writing which purports to be a contract of guaranty, but which has been signed without any previous request on the part of the alleged obligee and not in the latter’s presence, for no consideration except future advances to be made to a third person, is in legal effect a mere offer or proposal which, lacking acceptance, does not bind the writer as guarantor.” That language is paraphrased from an opinion by the United States Supreme Court in Davis Sewing Machine Company v. Richards, 115 U.S. 524 , 6 S.Ct. 173 , 29 L.E 1973In 38 Am.Jur.2d, Guaranty § 37, page 1035, we find the following language: “A writing which purports to be a contract of guaranty, but which has been signed without any previous request on the part of the alleged obligee and not in the latter’s presence, for no consideration except future advances to be made to a third person, is in legal effect a mere offer or proposal which, lacking acceptance, does not bind the writer as guarantor.” That language is paraphrased from an opinion by the United States Supreme Court in Davis Sewing Machine Company v. Richards, 115 U.S. 524 , 6 S.Ct. 173 , 29 L.E | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Citizens State Bank v. Iverson
green
2 sentences1916The acts of its cashier and president in turning these funds over to the bank to repay their shortage with the bank estops the bank to claim otherwise than that it has plaintiff’s funds, Citizens’ State Bank v. Iverson, 30 N. D. 497 , 153 N. W. 449 . 1916The acts of its cashier and president in turning these funds over to the bank to repay their shortage with the bank estops the bank to claim otherwise than that it has plaintiff’s funds, Citizens’ State Bank v. Iverson, 30 N. D. 497 , 153 N. W. 449 . | 1 | 1916–1916 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.