¶1Filed 10/18/11 by Clerk of Supreme Court
¶2IN THE SUPREME COURT
¶3STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
¶11Morris Tarnavsky, Plaintiff and Appellee
¶13and
¶15Roger Cymbaluk, Court Appointed Receiver of the
¶16Mary E. Tarnavsky Irrevocable Trust, Appellee
¶18v.
¶20Edward Tarnavsky, Personally and as
¶21Trustee of the Mary E. Tarnavsky
¶22Irrevocable Trust, Defendant and Appellant
¶24and
¶26Janet L. Bishop, Defendant
¶30No. 20100407
¶34Edward J. Tarnavsky, Plaintiff and Appellant
¶36v.
¶38Ron Rankin, Sheriff of McKenzie County,
¶39personally and in his professional capacity, Defendant and Appellee
¶43No. 20110027
¶47The Union Bank, Plaintiff and Appellee
¶49v.
¶51Edward Tarnavsky, Defendant and Appellant
¶53and
¶55Morris Tarnavsky and Vonne Tarnavsky, Defendants
¶59No. 20110061
¶64Appeals from the District Court of McKenzie County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable David W. Nelson, Judge.
¶66AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.
¶68Per Curiam.
¶70David Allan Tschider, 418 East Rosser Avenue, Suite 200, Bismarck, N.D. 58501-4046, for plaintiff and appellee Morris Tarnavsky.
¶72Kent A. Reierson, P.O. Box 1206, Williston, N.D. 58802-1206, for appellee Roger Cymbaluk.
¶74Sandra Lynn Voller (argued) and Scott Kenneth Porsborg (appeared), P.O. Box 460, Bismarck, N.D. 58502-0460, for defendant and appellee Ron Rankin.
¶76Kasey Duane McNary (argued) and Timothy George Richard (on brief), P.O. Box 6017, Fargo, N.D. 58108-6017, for plaintiff and appellee The Union Bank.
¶78Edward J. Tarnavsky, 12951 8th Street Northwest, Grassy Butte N.D. 58634; self-represented.
¶80Nos. 20100407, 20110027 & 20110061
¶82Per Curiam.
¶83[¶1] In consolidated appeals, Edward Tarnavsky appealed from the district court’s orders denying his motions in the underlying cases which sought relief under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b). On appeal, Tarnavsky argues that “the court ha[s] an appearance of impropriety” in the underlying cases sufficient to warrant reversal. Tarnavsky also argues the court abused its discretion in one underlying case by awarding payment to creditors directly from Tarnavsky’s trust income and by directing the receiver to grant easements from the trust. We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1).
¶84[¶2] The appellees seek various sanctions on appeal based on Tarnavsky’s frivolous appeals. We award double costs on appeal to the appellees. To the extent the various appellees wish to pursue additional sanctions, we remand to the district court and authorize the court in its discretion to determine and award reasonable attorney’s fees for the appeals and to consider the appellees’ requested injunctive relief.
¶85[¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
¶86Dale V. Sandstrom
¶87Daniel J. Crothers
¶88Mary Muehlen Maring
¶89Carol Ronning Kapsner