Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rolette County State's Attorney v. L.D.M.

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 2011No. 20100137Published

1DissentSandstrom, Justice

[¶ 10] The majority reverses on an issue not raised by L.D.M. — the adequacy of the detail in the findings. See N.D.R.App.P. 28 (the issues are specified in the statement of issues in the briefs of the parties); Geinert v. Geinert, 2002 ND 135, ¶ 8, 649 N.W.2d 237 (we do not address issues not raised by the parties). The respondent does not argue that findings were not sufficient, and the findings in this case are very similar to the findings affirmed in the previous case related to this respondent. Interest of L.D.M., 2005 ND 177, 704 N.W.2d 838.

[¶ 11] The evidence is overwhelming, and I…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Geinert v. GeinertNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
  2. O'Donnell v. L.D.M.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API