Holbach v. Dixon’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2023
8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Wetzel v. Schlenvogt · Gullickson v. Kline · Cusey v. Nagel · Wishnatsky v. Huey · Meier v. Said
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A person who petitions for a disorderly conduct restraining order must allege specific facts or threats that adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy of another person. See Cusey v. Nagel, 2005 ND 84, ¶ 7 , 695 N.W.2d 697 . For the purposes of this statute, “disorderly conduct” is broader than and differs from the crime of disorderly conduct. See N.D.C.C. § 12.1-31-01(1); see also Wetzel v. Schlenvogt, 2005 ND 190, ¶ 17 , 705 N.W.2d 836 . “Reasonable grounds” is synonymous with “probable cause.” Meier [v. Said, 2007 ND 18, ¶ 21 , 726 N.W.2d 852 ]; Wetzel , at ¶17. “Thus, ‘[rjeasonable grounds exist for obtaining a restraining order ... when the facts and circumstances presented to the judge are sufficient to warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe that acts constituting disorderly conduct have been committed.’ ” Wetzel , at ¶ 17 (quoting Wishnatsky v. Huey, 1997 ND 35, ¶ 14 , 560 N.W.2d 878 ). We have also held due process is required throughout the restraining order proceedings. Meier, 2007 ND 18, ¶ 15 , 726 N.W.2d 852 ; Wetzel, 2005 ND 190, ¶ 23 , 705 N.W.2d 836 . At the hearing, the petitioner must prove the allegations in the petition through sworn testimony. Meier , at ¶ 15. “In order to comport with due process, a fair hearing requires reasonable notice or opportunity to know of the claims of opposing parties, along with the opportunity to rebut those claims.” Id. Due process also requires a fair hearing, which prevents defects in the hearing process ”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harris v. Harris“intrusive or unwanted acts, words, or gestures that are intended to adversely affect the safety, security, or privacy”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. J.B. v. R.B.
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.