Ernst v. Tjon | |||||||
| 20040373 Court of Appeals |
Ronald R. Ernst, Plaintiff and Appellant
v. Stacey Tjon, Defendant and Appellee | ||||||
| Appeal from: |
District Court,
East Central Judicial District,
Cass County
Judge Douglas R. Herman | ||||||
| Nature of Action: | Torts (Negligence, Liab., Nuis.) | ||||||
| Counsel: |
| ||||||
| Term: | 04/2005 Argument: 04/28/2005 04:00pm | ||||||
| ND cite: | 2005 ND App | ||||||
| NW cite: |
704 N.W.2d 574
| ||||||
|
| |||||||
| Issues: |
Appellee's Statement of the Issues: I. Did the Trial Court Properly Dismiss Ernst's Defamation Claim Based on Qualified Privilege? A. General principles regarding privilege-absolute and qualified B. The trial court properly found that Tjon's incorrect statements were an occasion of qualified privilege and that Tjon did not abuse that privilege | ||||||
 Add Docket 20040373 RSS
| |||||||
| 1 | 12/23/2004 | NOTICE OF APPEAL: 12/20/2004 | ||
| 2 | 01/20/2005 | RECORD ON APPEAL | ||
| 3 | 01/25/2005 | APPELLANT BRIEF | ||
| 4 | 01/25/2005 | APPELLANT APPENDIX | ||
| 5 | 01/25/2005 | DISK NONCOMPLIANCE - ATB (Scanned) | ||
| 6 | 02/07/2005 | Copies of the trial court register of actions, NOA and judgment for ATA | ||
| 7 | 02/25/2005 | Copy of Order for Transcript from Patricia A. Roscoe, counsel for Appellee | ||
| 8 | 02/25/2005 | APPELLEE BRIEF | ||
| 9 | 02/25/2005 | APPELLEE APPENDIX | ||
| 10 | 02/28/2005 | DISK - aeb | ||
| 11 | 03/02/2005 | Letter from Roger Mjones dated 3-1-05 RE: Request for return of ROA | ||
| 12 | 03/02/2005 | ACTION BY CLERK (Req/Return/ROA). Granted | ||
| 13 | 03/02/2005 | RETURN OF ROA TO DIST. CT. | ||
| 14 | 03/04/2005 | MOTION FOR WAIVER OF ORAL ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF APPELLEE (letter dated 3-03-05 from Ms. Roscoe) | ||
| 15 | 03/08/2005 | REPLY BRIEF | ||
| 16 | 03/09/2005 | DISK NONCOMPLIANCE - RYB (scanned) | ||
| 17 | 03/09/2005 | TRANSCRIPTS DATED November 1, 2004 | ||
| 18 | 03/10/2005 | DISK of tra | ||
| 19 | 03/10/2005 | Refiled RECORD ON APPEAL | ||
| 20 | 03/10/2005 | MOTION FOR Tele-Conference Argument | ||
| 21 | 03/10/2005 | NO ACTION TAKEN (Mot/Tele-Conference Argument) | ||
| 22 | 03/22/2005 | NO SEPARATE ACTION TAKEN (Waiver of OA on behalf of Appellee) | ||
| 23 | 03/22/2005 | COURT OF APPEALS DETERMINED ORAL ARGUMENT NOT NECESSARY | ||
| 24 | 04/28/2005 | APPEARANCES: oral argument waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(a)(2) | ||
| 25 | 04/28/2005 | ARGUED: oral argument waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(a)(2) (Page 38) | ||
| 26 | 04/29/2005 | DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED BY SUMMARY DISP. | ||
| 27 | 04/29/2005 | UNANIMOUS OPINION: Per Curiam | ||
| 28 | 04/29/2005 | Costs on appeal taxed in favor of Appellee | ||
| 29 | 04/29/2005 | Judgment Mailed to Parties | ||
| 30 | 05/06/2005 | Corrected Opinion Page | ||
| 31 | 05/11/2005 | Corrected Judgment Mailed to Parties | ||
| 32 | 05/23/2005 | MANDATE | ||
| 33 | 05/25/2005 | RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE |