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 .
Berg v . Berg , 2018 ND 79 , 908 N . W . 2d 705
This divorce case involved issues of spousal support . The Supreme Court noted a District Court must make a spousal support award in accordance with the needs of the spouse seeking support and of the supporting spouse ’ s needs and ability to pay . The District Court must also consider the relevant factors under the Ruff-Fischer guidelines in determining an award of spousal support , but the District Court is not required to make specific findings on each factor , provided the appellate court can determine the reasons for the Court ’ s decision . The Court said property division and spousal support are interrelated and intertwined and often must be considered together . The Supreme Court affirmed the District Court ’ s award of spousal support even though the District Court did not explicitly quantify one party ’ s need for spousal support and the other ’ s ability to pay , nor did the District Court precisely calculate each party ’ s assets , debts , and expenses in determining spousal support , because the District Court ’ s findings did indicate it considered the party ’ s monthly expenses and property division amounts in awarding the spousal support . Therefore , because it did not appear to the Supreme Court the District Court clearly erred in awarding the spousal support it did , the support order was affirmed .
Rocky Mountain Steel Foundations , Inc . v . Brockett Co ., LLC , 2018 ND 96 , 909 N . W . 2d 671
Rocky Mountain was a subcontractor at an oil well construction site . It sold and delivered materials for installation on certain oil wells . Rocky Mountain recorded and perfected liens on the well leaseholds for the value of the materials it delivered , which were to be utilized in the construction of the wells , because even though the subcontractor Rocky Mountain delivered the materials to was paid in full by the project general contractor , Rocky Mountain was not , in turn , paid by that same subcontractor . Thus , Rocky Mountain sued to enforce its lien .
The primary issue in the case was whether N . D . C . C . § 35-24-04 permits recovery on the lien of subcontractor Rocky Mountain when the project owner has fully paid the general contractor , and allowing recovery of Rocky Mountain ’ s lien would result in the project owner being liable for a greater amount than its agreed upon contract price with the original contractor . The Supreme Court said the subcontractor ’ s lien was valid , even though allowing it increased the owner ’ s ultimate liability to an amount greater than the original contract price , because the owner was aware of Rocky Mountain ’ s lien before the owner paid its original contractor , without ensuring the Rocky Mountain lien would be paid from that payment . In that situation , N . D . C . C . § 35-24-04 provides that the risk of payments made to the original contractor is upon the owner after it receives notice a lien is claimed by a person other than the original contractor the owner pays .
Accordingly , the Supreme Court reversed the District Court judgment invalidating Rocky Mountain ’ s lien and remanded the case back to the District Court .
Bjerk v . Anderson , 2018 ND 124 , 911 N . W . 2d 343
In this unfortunate case , a young man consumed illegal drugs in a Grand Forks home owned by the defendant . Shortly after consuming the drug , the young decedent , along with two others , were directed to leave the property . The decedent collapsed outside of the home and his body was found later on a sidewalk near the defendant ’ s home .
Decedent ’ s parents commenced a wrongful death action against the property owner based on premises liability , on the theory the owner failed to exercise reasonable care to keep the house owned by him in a reasonably safe condition , free from illegal and dangerous activity , and free of drugs and illegal substances . The homeowner filed a motion for summary judgment , arguing he could not be held liable because he had no control over the residence he owned on the date of the decedent ’ s death because he had not lived there for approximately three years and a former girlfriend and her children were in fact occupying the home at the time of the incident . Summary judgment was granted by the District Court to the homeowner and the wrongful death suit was dismissed with prejudice . On appeal , the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed , concluding the homeowner ,
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 State 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 .
24 THE GAVEL