North Dakota Supreme Court Highlights
By Michael J . Morley
Author ’ s Note and Caveat : The following cases of interest were recently decided by the North Dakota Supreme Court . Because the following contain the author ’ s summary of the decisions , the reader is encouraged to read the entire published decision to determine its precedential value , if any , in a given case .
Hall v . Hall , et . al ., 2020 ND 205 . Filed 10-21-20 .
The Supreme Court reiterated that the doctrine of res judicata , or claim preclusion , prevents re-litigation of claims that were raised or could have been raised in prior actions between the same parties or their privies . However , a person appearing in an action in one capacity , individual or representative , is not thereby bound by or entitled to the benefits of the rule of res judicata in a subsequent action in which he appears in another capacity .
Suelzle v . ND DOT , 2020 ND 206 . Filed 10-21-20 .
Here , the Supreme Court held that a person may be arrested for actual physical control of a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol if the vehicle is located on private property in a private area to which the public has the right of access . Whether the public has that right of access is a question of fact , which may be determined from factors including the existence or absence of signs , gates , or barriers , whether or not there is routine use by the public not specifically invited to use the property such as for purposes of visiting or making deliveries , as well as the location of the vehicle on the property .
Bickel v . Bickel , 2020 ND 212 . Filed 10-21-20 .
In this child support case , the Supreme Court held that if the district court bases a child support obligation on income earned in
Michael J . Morley received his juris doctor with distinction and was admitted to the Order of the Coif upon graduation from the University of North Dakota School of Law in 1979 . That same year , he was admitted to practice law in North Dakota State Courts and the United States District Courts for the District of North Dakota . In 1981 , he was admitted in the Minnesota State Courts and the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota , as well as the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit . He is a member of the State Bar Associations of North Dakota and Minnesota and is currently president and shareholder of Morley Law Firm , Ltd ., in Grand Forks . less than a 12-month period , the court must explain why it did not utilize the evidence it had to extrapolate an income for a 12-month period . The Court further held that pursuant to N . D . Admin . Code § 75-02-04.1-02 ( 9 ), each child support order must include a statement of the net income of the obligor used to determine the child support obligation and how that net income was determined .
G & D Enterprises v . Liebelt , 2020 ND 213 . Filed 10-21-20 .
In this tort action , the Supreme Court held that the duty which gives rise to a nuisance claim is the absolute duty not to act in a way which unreasonably interferes with another person ’ s use and enjoyment of their property . Moreover , to succeed on a trespass claim , the plaintiff must establish the defendant intentionally entered the land of another or caused a thing or third person to do so , without the consent of the landowner .
WSI v . Tolman , 2020 ND 223 . Filed 10-21-20 .
The Supreme Court held in this case that , for purposes of WSI benefits , a compensable injury includes a mental or psychological condition caused by a physical injury , but only when the physical injury is determined with reasonable medical certainty to be at least 50 percent of the cause of the injured worker ’ s condition , as compared with all other contributing causes combined , and only when the condition did not preexist the work injury .
Titan Machinery v . Kluver , 2020 ND 225 . Filed 10-21-20 .
In this civil action for damages , the Supreme Court stated that indemnity is an equitable remedy which permits a party to recover reimbursement from another for the discharge of a liability that – as between the two parties – should have been discharged by the other . As an equitable doctrine , indemnity is not amenable to hard and fast rules , and the application of indemnity depends upon the facts of each case . A right of indemnity may arise by express agreement or by implication . Even if there is no express contractual duty for indemnification , indemnity nonetheless may be recovered if the evidence establishes an implied contract or if one party is exposed to liability by the action of another party who , in law or equity , should make good the loss of the other .
State v . Hajicek , 2020 ND 231 . Filed 11-19-20 .
In this case , the defendant appealed from a criminal judgment for driving under the influence . The defendant claimed the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence because the University of North Dakota police officer acted outside his
18 THE GAVEL