No. 24-414
Reuben Larson v. CommunityWorks North Dakota, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: appellate-procedure brief-requirements constitutional-challenge court-rules judicial-discretion procedural-due-process
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2024-12-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a court rule mandating brief page limits and paragraph numbering, with dismissal for non-compliance, is unconstitutional
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW — Is a rule of court unconstitutional which mandates that an appeal brief cannot exceed a certain number of pages, and which mandates that the appellant/appellee number the paragraphs in the brief, and if either or both is not complied with, one’s appeal brief will not be filed and so one’s appeal will be dismissed. Does a judge/justice have to give reasons for their ruling. Is it valid to cite and use the rule/statute under attack as the reason to deny the attack on the rule, to declare the rule legal. 1
Docket Entries
2024-12-09
Petition DENIED.
2024-11-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/6/2024.
2024-10-29
Waiver of right of respondent Community Works North Dakota, et al. to respond filed.
2024-08-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 12, 2024)
Attorneys
Community Works North Dakota, et al.
Garrett D. Ludwig — Kelsch Ruff Kranda Nagle & Ludwig, Respondent
Garrett D. Ludwig — Kelsch Ruff Kranda Nagle & Ludwig, Respondent