North Dakota Century Code

N.D. Cent. Code § 32-23-11 (2026)

Parties

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ND-LEGndlegis.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

When declaratory relief is sought, all persons who have or claim any interest that would be affected by the declaration must be made parties, and a declaration may not prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the proceeding. In any proceeding that involves the validity of a municipal ordinance or franchise, the municipality must be made a party, and is entitled to be heard, and if the statute, ordinance, or franchise is alleged to be unconstitutional, the attorney general of the state must be served with a copy of the proceeding and is entitled to be heard. Any trade or professional association authorized to do, and doing, business in the state and whose members are licensed and regulated by state or federal agencies has standing to bring an action for declaratory judgment to determine any question of construction or validity of any statute, ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation that threatens to injure its members.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 20 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1971–2023 · leading case: State v. Holbach, 2009 ND 37 (N.D. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Holbach, 2009 ND 37 (N.D. 2009). · cites it 6× “[¶ 20] The State argues N.D.C.C. § 32-23-11 applies, which is part of the chapter on declaratory judgments and requires the attorney general to be served with a copy of the proceeding if a statute is alleged to be unconstitutional.”

Wilkinson v. Bd. of Univ. & Sch. Lands of the State of N.D., 2017 ND 231 (N.D. 2017). · cites it 2× “” N.D.C.C. § 32-23-11. The United States appears to have an interest in the property that would be affected by the district court’s declaration that the State owns both the surface and the minerals of this property.”

Blackburn, Nickels & Smith, Inc. v. Nat'l Farmers Union Prop. & Cas. Co., 452 N.W.2d 319 (N.D. 1990). · cites it 2× “Our interpretation of the statute encourages settlement of claims by providing an avenue for speedy judicial resolution of viable disputes over underlying liabilities.”

Ralston Purina Co. v. Hagemeister, 188 N.W.2d 405 (N.D. 1971). · cites it 4× “Section 32-23-11, North Dakota Century Code, provides that where declaratory relief is sought, all persons who have or claim to have any interest which could be affected by the declaration shall be made parties, and no declaration shall prejudice the rights of persons not made…”

Funke v. Aggregate Constr., Inc., 2015 ND 123 (N.D. 2015). · cites it 4× “When declaratory relief is sought, all persons having or claiming any interest that would be affected by the declaration must be made parties, and a declaration may not prejudice the rights of persons not named as parties to the proceeding.”

Olympic Fin. Grp. v. ND Dep't of Fin. Institutions, 2023 ND 38 (N.D. 2023). · cites it 2× “” [¶9] A court may refuse to render a declaratory judgment if the judgment would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy giving rise to the proceeding. N.D.C.C. § 32-23-06. When declaratory relief is sought, all persons having or claiming any interest that would be affected…”

Paluck v. Bd. of Cty. Comm'rs, Stark Cnty., 307 N.W.2d 852 (N.D. 1981). · cites it 2× “Section 32-23-11, N.D.C.C., provides, in part, that if a statute is alleged to be unconstitutional "the attorney general of the state also shall be served with a copy of the proceeding and shall be entitled to be heard.”

First Bank of Buffalo v. Conrad, 350 N.W.2d 580 (N.D. 1984). · cites it 2× “Section 32-23-11 provides that the attorney general must be served with a copy of the proceedings and is entitled to be heard.”

City of Harwood v. The City of Reiles Acres, 2015 ND 33 (N.D. 2015). · cites it 2× “N.D.C.C. § 32-23-11. The provisions authorizing declaratory relief are remedial and are to be construed and administered liberally to afford relief from uncertainty about rights, status, and other legal relations.”

Hosp. Servs., Inc. v. Brooks, 229 N.W.2d 69 (N.D. 1975). · cites it 2× “The record does not show that the Attorney General was served and afforded an opportunity to appear as required by § 32-23-11, N.D.C.C., when a statute is alleged to be unconstitutional.”

Rebel v. Nodak Mut. Ins. Co., 1998 ND 194 (N.D. 1998). · cites it 2× “Nodak moved to have Haas joined as a necessary party under N.D.C.C. § 32-23-11 and N.D.R.Civ.P. 19(a), and the trial court granted the motion.”

State ex rel. Olson v. Graff, 287 N.W.2d 87 (N.D. 1979). · cites it 6× “Notice of this motion was served upon the attorney general as required by Section 32-23-11, NDCC, but he did not enter an appearance.”

Show all 20 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.