Braunberger v. Interstate Engineering Inc.

19 Citing cases

  1. N.D. Dep't of Transp. v. Schmitz

    2018 N.D. 113 (N.D. 2018)   Cited 5 times
    In Schmitz, the North Dakota Supreme Court held that a court has the discretion under N.D. Cent. Code § 32-15-32 (the statute providing for recovery of attorney fees in condemnation cases) to award fees for making an application for attorney fees and costs.

    Attorney travel and meal expenses are normally reimbursed by the client and not assessed as disbursements." Braunberger v. Interstate Eng’g, Inc. , 2000 ND 45, ¶ 20, 607 N.W.2d 904 (citation omitted). "Attorney travel expenses for discovery are generally not recoverable by a prevailing party as costs or disbursements.

  2. Brandt v. Milbrath

    2002 N.D. 117 (N.D. 2002)   Cited 9 times
    Refusing to remand a case in which the district court may have applied an incorrect standard to a motion for a new trial because the appellant may have invited the possible error

    A [¶ 24] A new trial is permitted under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59(b) "when a jury verdict is unsupported by sufficient evidence or contrary to law."Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'g, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶ 7, 607 N.W.2d 904. "A motion under Rule 59(b)(6) is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court." Id.

  3. Gepner v. Fujicolor Processing

    2001 N.D. 207 (N.D. 2001)   Cited 27 times
    Stating N.D.C.C. ch. 65-09 permits an employee of an uninsured employer to recover WSI benefits and to sue the employer in tort

    An abuse of discretion by the trial court is never assumed; the burden is on the party seeking relief to affirmatively establish it. US Bank Nat'lAss'n v. Arnold, 2001 ND 130, ¶ 23, 631 N.W.2d 150; Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'g, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶ 7, 607 N.W.2d 904; First Nat'l Bank of Crosby v. Bjorgen, 389 N.W.2d 789, 794 (N.D. 1986). The trial court abuses its discretion only when it acts in an arbitrary, unreasonable, or unconscionable manner.

  4. Uren v. Dakota Dust-Tex, Inc.

    2002 N.D. 81 (N.D. 2002)   Cited 7 times
    Holding that an indemnification provision and a provision requiring liability insurance in the lease did not constitute "express agreement indicating [the tenant] should not be considered an implied co-insured under [the landlord's] property insurance policy"

    [¶ 32] The district court allowed Dakota to recover as costs $509.41 for its attorney's travel expenses to attend an out-of-state pretrial inspection of a radio which had been found near the source of the fire. Uren argues that attorney travel expenses are not taxable as costs under Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'g, Inc., 2000 ND 45, 607 N.W.2d 904. In Braunberger, at ¶ 20, we held that attorney fees and expenses are generally not assessed as disbursements, but are normally reimbursed by the client.

  5. Davis v. Mercy Med. Ctr.

    2023 N.D. 153 (N.D. 2023)   Cited 4 times

    WFND, LLC v. Fargo Marc, LLC, 2007 ND 67, ¶ 49, 730 N.W.2d 841. A prevailing party in a tort action "must prevail at least on the issues of negligence and proximate cause." Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'g, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶ 14, 607 N.W.2d 904 (quoting Andrews v. O'Hearn, 387 N.W.2d 716, 732 (N.D. 1986)).

  6. Great Plains Royalty Corp. v. Earl Schwartz Co.

    2022 N.D. 156 (N.D. 2022)   Cited 1 times

    is not limited to evidence actually introduced at trial." Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'g, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶ 18, 607 N.W.2d 904. However, recovery is limited to expenses incurred in preparation for trial.

  7. Johnson v. Buskohl Constr. Inc.

    2015 N.D. 268 (N.D. 2015)   Cited 7 times

    ” Sollin v. Wangler, 2001 ND 96, ¶ 8, 627 N.W.2d 159. “The standard for reviewing an order denying a motion for a new trial is, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, whether there is sufficient evidence to justify the verdict.” Braunberger v. Interstate Engineering, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶ 7, 607 N.W.2d 904.A

  8. Heng v. Rotech Medical Corp.

    2006 N.D. 176 (N.D. 2006)   Cited 29 times
    Applying McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting analytical framework to state whistle-blower suit

    In Uren v. Dakota Dust-Tex, Inc., 2002 ND 81, ¶ 34, 643 N.W.2d 678, this Court held that attorney travel expenses for discovery are not recoverable as costs but "are part of the attorney's fees and expenses which are normally reimbursed by the client." See also Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'r, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶ 20, 607 N.W.2d 904 (abuse of discretion to award attorney hotel and meal expenses as costs). Under the reasoning of Uren, Braunberger, and the majority of courts that have specifically addressed the question, we conclude that electronic legal research fees are a component of attorney fees and cannot be separately taxed as costs.

  9. Nesvig v. Nesvig

    2006 N.D. 66 (N.D. 2006)   Cited 26 times
    Holding a district court did not abuse its discretion because it could not compel an unretained expert to appear and provide expert testimony

    [¶ 34] The question of who is a prevailing party for an award of disbursements under N.D.C.C. § 28-26-06 is a question of law, subject to de novo review, while the question of the amounts to be allowed for disbursements is one of fact, subject to an abuse of discretion standard. Dowhan v. Brockman, 2001 ND 70, ¶ 10, 624 N.W.2d 690 (citing Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'g, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶¶ 13, 24, 607 N.W.2d 904; Lemer v. Campbell, 1999 ND 223, ¶ 6, 602 N.W.2d 686). The district court is in a much better position than this Court to determine the amount, reasonableness, and necessity of the costs and disbursements sought by the prevailing party.

  10. Riemers v. Anderson

    2004 N.D. 109 (N.D. 2004)   Cited 8 times
    Affirming an order denying Riemers' motions for default judgment and summary judgment and dismissing his complaints, with prejudice, against persons involved in arresting and prosecuting him for assault of Peters-Riemers

    See Lemer v. Campbell, 1999 ND 223, ¶ 11, 602 N.W.2d 686. An award of costs under N.D.C.C. § 28-26-10 is discretionary. Uren v. Dust-Tex, Inc., 2002 ND 81, ¶ 31, 643 N.W.2d 678. A trial court's decision on an award of disbursements under N.D.C.C. § 28-26-06 will be overturned only if an abuse of discretion is shown. Braunberger v. Interstate Eng'g, Inc., 2000 ND 45, ¶ 14, 607 N.W.2d 904. An abuse of discretion is never assumed; the burden is on a party seeking relief to affirmatively establish it. Jundt v. Jurassic Res. Dev. of North America, L.L.C., 2003 ND 9, ¶ 10, 656 N.W.2d 15. From our review, we conclude Riemers has not shown that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding costs and disbursements. C.