Legal Opinion

Richmond v. Nodland

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 1996No. Civ. 960104PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VANDE WALLE, Chief Justice.

Donald Richmond appealed from the district court’s summary judgment dismissing his complaint for slander per se, the tort of outrage, and intentional infliction of emotional distress against the defendants, Irvin Nod-land and Amanda Broer. We conclude that Nodland’s and Broer’s statements to the police were protected by qualified privilege and that Richmond did not offer evidence of malice. We affirm the district court’s dismissal.

On September 14, 1993, Broer, a house-guest at Nodland’s home, was babysitting Nodland’s child when she saw a prowler in the backyard.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Correllas v. ViveirosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1991
  2. Fridovich v. FridovichSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
  3. Soentgen v. Quain & Ramstad Clinic, P.C.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Williams v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1982
  5. Layne v. Builders Plumbing Supply Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1991

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Nelson v. GilletteNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Riemers v. Grand Forks HeraldNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Forster v. West Dakota Veterinary Clinic, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Jose v. Norwest Bank North Dakota, N.A.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Burr v. KulasNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997

14 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