Runge v. Runge
Opinion
NOTE: SUMMARY OPINION, SEE NORTH DAKOTA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, RULE 35.1
[¶ 1] Gregory Ian Runge appealed the district court's judgment determining the valuation and division of marital property. Gregory Runge claims the trial court erred by not explaining the distribution and by dividing the couple's property inequitably. We conclude the trial court's distribution of the couple's marital estate is not clearly erroneous. We therefore affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
[¶ 2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Dale V. Sandstrom
William A. Neumann
Mary Muehlen Maring
Gordon O. Hoberg, S.J.
[¶ 3] Gordon O. Hoberg, S.J., sitting in place of Kapsner, J., disqualified.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2001 ND 39 (Runge v. Runge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.