State v. Richards

¶1Filed 2/23/99 by Clerk of Supreme Court

¶2IN THE SUPREME COURT

¶3STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

¶4

¶5

¶6

¶71999 ND 21

¶8

¶9

¶10

¶11Raymond Hovland, Plaintiff and Appellant

¶12

¶13v.

¶14

¶15Tom McCabe, Defendant and Appellee

¶16

¶17

¶18

¶19No. 980320

¶20

¶21

¶22

¶23Appeal from the District Court of McKenzie County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable William W. McLees, Judge.

¶24

¶25AFFIRMED.

¶26

¶27Per Curiam.

¶28

¶29Corey J. Quinton (argued) and Paul R. Oppegard of Smith Bakke Hovland & Oppegard, P.O. Box 657, Moorhead, MN 56560-0657, plaintiff and appellant.

¶30

¶31Mark R. Hays (argued) and James E. Nostdahl of Pringle & Herigstad, P.O. Box 1000, Minot, N.D. 58702-1000, for defendant and appellee.

¶32Hovland v. McCabe

¶33No. 980320

¶34

¶35Per Curiam.

¶36[¶1] Raymond Hovland appeals from an order granting summary judgment in favor of Tom McCabe.  On appeal, Hovland argues the district court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether Hovland has or will meet the tort thresholds contained in the North Dakota Auto Reparations Act, N.D.C.C. § 26.1-41-01(21).

¶37[¶2] We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).   See Ellingson v. Knudson , 498 N.W.2d 814 (N.D. 1993).

¶38[¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

¶39William A. Neumann

¶40Dale V. Sandstrom

¶41Carol Ronning Kapsner

¶42Mary Muehlen Maring