A CLOSER LOOK AT NEW RULES ADOPTED ON MARCH 1
A CLOSER LOOK AT NEW RULES ADOPTED ON MARCH 1
ANDY FORWARD Attorney at Law
In the winter 2025 Gavel, this column addressed the March 1 rule amendments, providing a brief description of the amendments approved by the Supreme Court. This column will provide a closer look at some new and rewritten rules, which took effect on March 1.
N. D. R. Ct. 5.5 – Civil Compromise( New Rule)
Rule 5.5 was adopted to establish a standard procedure for filing a notice of a civil compromise under N. D. C. C. §§ 29-01-16 through 29-01-19. Subdivision( a) states a defendant charged with a misdemeanor or infraction may enter into a civil compromise with the injured party under N. D. C. C. § 29-01-16.
If a civil compromise is obtained, the defendant must provide notice to the court and parties. The notice must be accompanied by:( 1) a declaration from the injured person acknowledging the person has received satisfaction for the injury and consents to the discharge;( 2) a brief explaining the legal requirements for a stay of the proceedings and discharge of the defendant have been satisfied in the matter; and( 3) a proposed order to stay proceedings and discharge the defendant from criminal prosecution. Any objection to the compromise must be filed within 14 days of service of the notice.
N. D. R. Ct. 10.3 – Electronic Court Seals( New Rule)
Rule 10.3 was adopted to allow court documents to include an electronic seal of the court and an electronic image of the signature or electronic facsimile signature of a judge, clerk, or other authorized person.
N. D. Sup. Ct. Admin. R. 58 – Vexatious Litigation( Rewritten Rule)
Rule 58 was rewritten to make the rule easier to understand and address problems experienced by clerks of court involving filings by vexatious litigants. In Section 2, the definition of“ litigation” was expanded to include small claims actions. A definition of“ vexatious conduct” was added, and the definition of“ vexatious litigant” was updated.
Section 3 was updated to establish a procedure for a court, either on its own or at the request of a party, to declare a party a vexatious litigant. Before issuing a pre-filing order, the court must give the proposed vexatious litigant 14 days to respond to the proposed order and supporting findings. A pre-filing order may prohibit a vexatious litigant from filing new litigation or documents into an existing case; however, the order must allow the litigant to file an application seeking leave to file.
Section 4 discusses the procedure for a vexatious litigant to file new litigation or documents into existing litigation. Section 4 specifies a vexatious litigant must first file an application seeking leave to file. The court must rule on the application before ruling on the merits of a proposed filing. If the court grants leave to file, the opposing party’ s time to answer or respond begins to run when the party is served with the court’ s order and a copy of the new litigation or document.
Section 5 was updated to address how a court may sanction a vexatious litigant for failing to follow a pre-filing order. Section 6 clarifies the appealability of certain orders. A pre-filing order designating a person as a vexatious litigant may be appealed, but an order denying an application for leave to file is not appealable. Section 8 was updated to prohibit self-represented vexatious litigants from filing electronically.
N. D. R. Juv. P. 10.2 – Admissions( New Rule)
Rule 10.2 was adopted to establish a procedure on admissions in juvenile delinquency matters. The rule is similar to N. D. R. Crim. P. 11, dealing with pleas. Subdivision( a) states a child may enter an admission any time after a petition is filed.
Subdivision( b) requires the court to give certain advisements to a child before accepting an admission. The court must address the child personally and advise the child of his or her rights, such as the right to a hearing, to be represented by counsel, and to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. The court must determine the child acknowledges that facts exist supporting the admission. The court must decide the admission is voluntary.
A child may withdraw an admission under subdivision( c). The court may allow a withdrawal before disposition, if it is fair and just to do so, or at any time, after showing that withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice.
The link to access the court rules is available on the North Dakota Supreme Court website, www. ndcourts. gov.
22 THE GAVEL