Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 North Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Interest of JSgreen2 sentences2005Under this more probing standard, “we will affirm an order for involuntary treatment unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.” Id. [¶ 6] P.B. argues that under N.D.C.C. § 25-03.1-40(11) he retains all civil rights, including the constitutional right “to obtain employment wherever possible.” N.D. 2005Under this more probing standard, “we will affirm an order for involuntary treatment unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.” See Interest of P.B., 2005 ND 201, ¶ 5 , 706 N.W.2d 78 (quoting Interest of J.S., 530 N.W.2d 331, 333 (N.D.1995)). [¶ 10] The trial court’s decision was not induced by a clearly erroneous view of the law. | 2 | 4 |
Berreman v. West Publishing Co.green2 sentences2008Berreman favorably cites and relies on the Coleman decision, not for a probing analysis of how or when an employee became a share holder but for the simple proposition "that shareholder who signed buy-back agreement bargained for right to be shareholder only while employed." Berreman , at 375. 2008Berreman favorably cites and relies on the Coleman decision, not for a probing analysis of how or when an employee became a share holder but for the simple proposition "that shareholder who signed buy-back agreement bargained for right to be shareholder only while employed.” Berreman , at 375. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
In Re Pb
neutral
2 sentences2016“Under this more probing standard, ‘we will affirm an order for involuntary treatment unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.’ ” Id. (quoting In re P.B., 2005 ND 201, ¶ 5 , 706 N.W.2d 78 ). [¶ 5] Section 25-03.1-18.1, N.D.C.C., governs court-authorized involuntary treatment with prescribed medication. 2016“Under this more probing standard, ‘we will affirm an order for involuntary treatment unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.’ ” Id. (quoting In re P.B., 2005 ND 201, ¶ 5 , 706 N.W.2d 78 ). [¶ 5] Section 25-03.1-18.1, N.D.C.C., governs court-authorized involuntary treatment with prescribed medication. | 6 | 2005–2016 |
Pryatel v. M.M.
green
2 sentences2016“Under this more probing standard, ‘we will affirm an order for involuntary treatment unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.’ ” Id. (quoting In re P.B., 2005 ND 201, ¶ 5 , 706 N.W.2d 78 ). [¶ 5] Section 25-03.1-18.1, N.D.C.C., governs court-authorized involuntary treatment with prescribed medication. 2006“Under this more probing standard, ‘we will affirm an order ... unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.’ ” Interest of M.M., 2005 ND 219, ¶ 9 , 707 N.W.2d 78 (quoting Interest of P.B., 2005 ND 201, ¶ 5 , 706 N.W.2d 78 ). | 4 | 2006–2016 |
In Interest of Mm
green
2 sentences2006"Under this more probing standard, `we will affirm an order . . . unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.'" Interest of M.M., 2005 ND 219, ¶ 9 , 707 N.W.2d 78 (quoting Interest of P.B., 2005 ND 201, ¶ 5 , 706 N.W.2d 78 ). 2006“Under this more probing standard, ‘we will affirm an order ... unless it is induced by an erroneous view of the law or if we are firmly convinced it is not supported by clear and convincing evidence.’ ” Interest of M.M., 2005 ND 219, ¶ 9 , 707 N.W.2d 78 (quoting Interest of P.B., 2005 ND 201, ¶ 5 , 706 N.W.2d 78 ). | 2 | 2006–2006 |
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.