Interest of J.O., L.O., A.O., & A.O.

2025 ND 119
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 3, 2025
DocketNos. 20250036 - 20250039
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 ND 119 (Interest of J.O., L.O., A.O., & A.O.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Interest of J.O., L.O., A.O., & A.O., 2025 ND 119 (N.D. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2025 ND 119

Interest of J.O., Child

State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. J.O., child; D.O., father; Barb Oliger, Guardian ad Litem, Respondents and A.M.O., mother, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20250036

Interest of L.O., Child

State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. L.O., child; D.O., father; Barb Oliger, Guardian ad Litem, Respondents and A.M.O., mother, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20250037 Interest of A.O., Child

State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. A.O., child; D.O., father; Barb Oliger, Guardian ad Litem, Respondents and A.M.O., mother, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20250038

Interest of A.O., Child

State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. A.O., child; D.O., father; Barb Oliger, Guardian ad Litem, Respondents and A.M.O., mother, Respondent and Appellant

No. 20250039

Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Mercer County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable David E. Reich, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Todd A. Schwarz, State’s Attorney, Stanton, ND, for petitioner and appellee; on brief.

Kiara C. Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, ND, for repondent and appellant; on brief. Interest of J.O., L.O., A.O., & A.O. Nos. 20250036 – 20250039

[¶1] A.M.O., the mother of the four children in these consolidated cases, appeals from a juvenile court order holding the children are in need of protection. On appeal, she argues the court erred in finding clear and convincing evidence establishes the children are in need of protection.

[¶2] Following a trial in October 2024, the judicial referee concluded the children were in need of protection. A.M.O. requested a district judge review the referee’s order. After conducting a de novo review under N.D. Sup. Ct. Admin. R. 13, § 11, the district judge adopted the referee’s findings and order.

[¶3] After reviewing the record and the juvenile court’s findings, we conclude the court’s findings are supported by the evidence and are not clearly erroneous. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 ND 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/interest-of-jo-lo-ao-ao-nd-2025.