Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2024 ND 116

Idso v. Idso

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided June 6, 2024

North Dakota Supreme Court · decided 2024-06-06

An order of contempt of court is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P.35.1(a)(2) and(8).

Decided 2024-06-06

                       IN THE SUPREME COURT
                       STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                                     
2024 ND 116

Nancy Lee Idso,                                                   Plaintiff and Appellee
      v.
Dale John Idso, Jr.,                                           Defendant and Appellant


                                     No. 20230387

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the
Honorable John C. Irby, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Kimberlie M. Larson, West Fargo, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.

Dale J. Idso, Jr., self-represented, Mapleton, ND, defendant and appellant; submitted on
brief.
                                        Idso v. Idso
                                       No. 20230387

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Dale Idso appeals from an order finding him in contempt of court. Nancy Idso
argues this appeal is frivolous and requests attorney’s fees and double costs.

[¶2] On appeal, Dale Idso argues that the marriage between himself and Nancy Idso was
invalid and that the district court erred in its property distribution. Dale Idso’s brief does
not meet the minimum requirements in N.D.R.App.P. 28, nor did he present any argument
regarding how the court abused its discretion in making a contempt determination. Under
N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8), this Court may summarily affirm a judgment if the appellant’s
brief fails to comply with N.D.R.App.P. 28.

[¶3] After a review of the record, we are satisfied there is evidence to support the court’s
property distribution, we are not left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been
made, and we conclude the findings and distributions were not clearly erroneous.

[¶4]   We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (8).

[¶5] Nancy Idso requests attorney’s fees and double costs for defending this frivolous
appeal. Under N.D.R.App.P. 38, the Court “may award just damages and single or double
costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees,” if it determines an appeal is frivolous. The two
issues Dale Idso raised on appeal were not raised in the district court on Nancy Idso’s
motion for contempt of court. Having concluded this appeal is frivolous, we award Nancy
Idso double costs and attorney’s fees in the amount of $1,625.00.

[¶6]   Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
       Daniel J. Crothers
       Lisa Fair McEvers
       Jerod E. Tufte
       Douglas A. Bahr




                                              1

/2024/nd/116 · .json · Public domain