Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Rasmussen v. Harvey

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 2016No. 20160219Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Crothers, Justice,

concurring in part and dissenting in part..

[¶ 12] I concur with the portion of the majority opinion that affirms finding Jerry Harvey in contempt and modifying his parenting time. I respectfully dissent from that part reversing the district court’s order of attorney’s fees.

[¶ 13] Undisputedly, the district court has discretion in actions like this to award attorney’s fees. Here the district court exercised that discretion and awarded attorney’s fees to' Rasmussen, citing both N.D.C.C. § 27-10-01.4(1)(a) (remedial sanctions) and N.D.C.C. § 14-05-23 (attorney’s fees in divorce…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. First National Bank of Belfield v. BurichNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  2. State v. RamseyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Larson v. LarsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
  4. Thompson v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
  5. State v. OttoNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API