Legal Opinion

State v. Nickel

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided October 18, 2011No. Nos. 20100410-20100412PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CROTHERS, Justice.

[¶ 1] The State appeals from three orders dismissing several controlled substance-related charges against William Joseph Nickel. We conclude the district court’s finding the North Dakota Board of Pharmacy (“Board”) did not substantially comply with the requirement under N.D.C.C. § 28-32-03(5) (2009) that it “take appropriate measures to make interim final rules known to every person who may be affected by them” is not clearly erroneous. The district court therefore did not err in dismissing the charges against Nickel because the emergency interim final rule upon which those…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Medcenter One, Inc. v. North Dakota State Board of PharmacyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Stensrud v. Mayville State CollegeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Black Property Owners Assn. v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. Illies v. IlliesNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Pember v. ShapiroNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State, ex rel. Madden v. RustadNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Haag v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API