Opinion
20220333
04-13-2023
Shirley Krueger, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Albert Krueger, Defendant and Appellant
Micheal A. Mulloy, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief. Albert D. Krueger, Harvey, ND, self-represented; submitted on brief.
Appeal from the District Court of Sheridan County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable David E. Reich, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Micheal A. Mulloy, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
Albert D. Krueger, Harvey, ND, self-represented; submitted on brief.
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