Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Olmstead v. Miller

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 19, 1986No. Civ. 11006Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMeschke, Justice

I concur that Miller is liable and that Olmsteads’ action is not controlled by Chapter 26-41, N.D.C.C. But, I would hold that the evidence was sufficient to warrant submission to the jury of Olmsteads’ claim of damages for future suffering and medical expenses. I would also hold that evidence of the plaintiffs’ pecuniary circumstances was properly admitted. And, since plaintiffs are obviously entitled to compensatory damages, there is no reason to vacate the award of punitive damages.

*824Kevin testified that the physical effects of his injury continued up to the date of trial. This evidence…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Lipinski v. Title InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Dahlen v. LandisNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Fauver v. WilkoskeMontana Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Clark v. JosephsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Utlaut v. Glick Real Estate Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1952

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API