Cermak v. Cermak

• Decision Date: 22 September 1995
• Docket Number: No. 950067,950067
• Citation: 544 N.W.2d 176
• Parties: NOTICE: "SUMMARY DISPOSITION, SEE NORTH DAKOTA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, RULE 35.1(a)." Duane E. CERMAK, Plaintiff, Appellee, and Cross-Appellant, v. Loretta R. CERMAK, Defendant, Appellant, and Cross-Appellee. Civ.
• Court: North Dakota Supreme Court

Page 176

544 N.W.2d 176

NOTICE: "SUMMARY DISPOSITION, SEE NORTH DAKOTA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, RULE 35.1(a)."

Duane E. CERMAK, Plaintiff, Appellee, and Cross-Appellant, v. Loretta R. CERMAK, Defendant, Appellant, and Cross-Appellee.

Civ. No. 950067.

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

Sept. 22, 1995.

William D. Schmidt (argued), Bismarck, for plaintiff, appellee, and cross-appellant.

Richard B. Baer (argued), Bismarck, for defendant, appellant, and cross-appellee.

District Court, Burleigh County

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM.

Loretta Cermak appeals from that portion of a judgment entered by the District Court for Burleigh County awarding a retirement fund and savings bonds to Duane Cermak. Duane cross-appeals from that portion of the judgment awarding Loretta permanent spousal support. We affirm pursuant to Rule 35.1(a)(2), N.D.R.App.P. Schmidkunz v. Schmidkunz, 529 N.W.2d 857, 860 (N.D.1995) (stating the trial court must make an equitable, not necessarily equal, distribution of the parties' real and personal property); Heley v. Heley, 506 N.W.2d 715, 720 (N.D.1993) (stating spousal support may be required indefinitely to maintain a spouse who cannot be adequately restored to independent economic status).

VANDE WALLE, C.J., and NEUMANN, LEVINE, MESCHKE and SANDSTROM, JJ., concur.