Krueger v. Krueger
Opinion
FILED
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
APRIL 13, 2023
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2023 ND 74
Shirley Krueger, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Albert Krueger, Defendant and Appellant
No. 20220333
Appeal from the District Court of Sheridan County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable David E. Reich, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Micheal A. Mulloy, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
Albert D. Krueger, Harvey, ND, self-represented; submitted on brief.
Krueger v. Krueger
No. 20220333
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Albert Krueger appeals from a district court order denying his motion to modify spousal support and granting Shirley Krueger’s motion for contempt. He argues the court erred by not terminating his spousal support obligation and finding him in contempt for failing to pay Shirley Krueger spousal support. He also argues the court erred by allowing Shirley Krueger’s son to testify on the rental value of Albert Krueger’s farmland. After reviewing the record, the district court’s findings on spousal support are not clearly erroneous, and the court’s decisions on witness testimony and contempt were not an abuse of discretion. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).
[¶2] 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
2023 ND 74 (Krueger v. Krueger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.