Riemers v. Peters-Riemers

20030353

Roland C. Riemers, Plaintiff and Appellant
v.
Jenese Peters-Riemers,
Michael L. Gjesdahl, and
Gjesdahl & Dietz, PLLP, Defendants and Appellees

Appeal from:

District Court, Northeast Central Judicial District, Grand Forks County
Judge Karen Kosanda Braaten

Nature of Action:

Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.)

Counsel:

Appellant:		Pro se
Appellee:		Gjesdahl Law Office

Term:

04/2004 Argument: 04/28/2004 10:45am

ND cite:

2004 ND 153

NW cite:

684 N.W.2d 619

Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,^© a free download.

Issues:

Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
A. Did the court err by ruling the Defendants were free to commit torts against Roland before, during and post divorce because they are protected from later civil action by res judicata and collateral estoppel stemming from the divorce action?
B. Did the court err by ruling that Roland had presented no facts supporting Jenese had given &/or had conspired to give false testimony?
C. Did the court err by ruling the Defendants are absolutely free to give perjured testimony without fear of later civil action?
D. Did the court err by ruling the Defendants are free to deny Roland's court ordered visitation and a meaningful relationship with his son as the Defendants are protected from civil action because only the divorce trail court can enforce visitation provisions?
E. Did the court err by ruling Roland had failed to present any evidence supporting his claim that Gjesdahl misrepresented facts, delayed settlement and was guilty of deceit and collusion in court as well as failed to show a causal relationship between those misrepresented facts and harm to Roland?
F. Did the court err by ruling that Roland is barred from a claim of abuse of process for false jailing by res judicata, collateral estoppel and failure to provide a factual basis?
G. Did the court error in not granting a 90 day continuance and ordering the Defendants to answer Roland's discovery requests?

Reply Brief Issues
A. Did Grand Forks Referee rule that Jenese had not threatened Roland with knives and guns?
B. Were Jenese's allegations against Roland uniformly accepted and Roland's allegations and contentions uniformly rejected?
C. Were days of divorce testimony given over to litigating the parties' competing claims?
D. Should this court adopt the general rule that there is no civil action for damages for perjury?

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
Reviewing the entire record de novo, did the trial court properly dismiss all of Roland Riemers' causes of action against the defendants herein?
Did the trial court abuse its discretion in refusing Roland Riemers' request for additional time to conduct discovery?

Add Docket 20030353 RSS

Docket entries:

1	12/05/2003	NOTICE OF APPEAL: 12/03/2003
2	12/05/2003	ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 12/03/2003
3	12/12/2003	Acknowledgment of Order for Transcript & Request for RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL: 01/22/2004
4	01/12/2004	TRANSCRIPT DATED May 28, 2003
5	01/13/2004	DISK - TRA (5-28-03)
6	01/14/2004	RECORD ON APPEAL
7	02/17/2004	APPELLANT BRIEF
8	02/17/2004	APPELLANT APPENDIX
9	02/18/2004	DISK - ATB
10	02/18/2004	Plaintiff's Rule 11 Answer
11	02/26/2004	Rule 11 Motion (filed by Mr. Gjesdahl for Defendants & Appellees)
12	03/18/2004	APPELLEE BRIEF
13	03/18/2004	APPELLEE APPENDIX
14	03/22/2004	Corrected Covers for AEB - inserted
15	03/23/2004	Corrected TOA for AEB - inserted
16	03/23/2004	DISK - AEB
17	03/24/2004	Copies of corrected pages for AEB - inserted
18	03/29/2004	"Brief and Affidavit of Michael L. Gjesdahl in Support of Rule 11 Motion"
19	04/05/2004	Addendum to Rule 11 Answer
20	04/04/2004	REPLY BRIEF of Appellant
21	04/06/2004	DISK - RYB
22	04/28/2004	APPEARANCES: Roland C. Riemers; Michael L. Gjesdahl
23	04/28/2004	ARGUED: Riemers; Gjesdahl (Vol. Y; Page 234)
24	04/28/2004	ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
25	07/23/2004	DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
26	07/23/2004	SPLIT OPINION: Maring, Mary Muehlen
27	07/23/2004	(CONCUR OR DISSENT): Kapsner, Carol Ronning: CON/DIS
28	07/23/2004	ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Motion for Rule 11 sanctions - see opinion). Denied
29	07/23/2004	(CONCUR OR DISSENT): Neumann, William A.: JN/CON
30	07/23/2004	Judgment Mailed to Parties
31	08/18/2004	MANDATE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 11/20/2009