.J.K. v. M.J.K. (In re M.J.K.)

919 N.W.2d 334
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 6, 2018
DocketNo. 20180058
StatusPublished

This text of 919 N.W.2d 334 (.J.K. v. M.J.K. (In re M.J.K.)) 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
.J.K. v. M.J.K. (In re M.J.K.), 919 N.W.2d 334 (N.D. 2018).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

*335[¶ 1] M.J.K. appeals from a district court order continuing his guardianship. He argues the district court erred in finding that M.J.K. failed to establish a prima facie case for termination of guardianship, and that due process violations resulted in a void judgment appointing the current guardian. The district court's order is not based on findings of fact that are clearly erroneous. The due process argument was not pursued at the district court and is waived. State v. Kieper , 2008 ND 65, ¶ 16, 747 N.W.2d 497 (Constitutional issues not raised before the district court will not be considered for the first time on appeal.). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

[¶ 2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jon J. Jensen

Jerod E. Tufte

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

Related

State v. Kieper
2008 ND 65 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
919 N.W.2d 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jk-v-mjk-in-re-mjk-nd-2018.