Legal Opinion

First Western Bank v. Wickman

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 1994No. Civ. 930188PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SANDSTROM, Justice.

“Clerical mistakes” in judgments may be corrected under Rule 60(a), N.D.R.Civ.P. This case construes the term, clerical mistake.

In this foreclosure action, the defendant, Alice Wickman, claims the amount of the judgment is a “clerical mistake” because it is inconsistent with the bank’s notice before foreclosure. The district court denied Wickman’s Motion to Correct Clerical Error. We affirm. Rule 60(a) is for correcting errors due to oversight or omission and is not a substitute for direct appeal on substantive matters of fact or law.

I

First Western Bank lent Alice Wickman…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. Mary StuartCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
  2. Gruebele v. GruebeleNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Jack W. Kelley v. Bank Building and Equipment Corporation of America, a Corporation, and Advance Glass Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1972
  4. Volk v. VolkNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Enderlin Farmers Store Co. v. WitliffNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Kukla v. KuklaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Wolff v. WeberSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  3. First Western Bank & Trust v. WickmanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Fargo Glass and Paint Co. v. RandallNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Nagel v. City of BismarckNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004

5 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