Courchene v. Delaney Distributors, Inc., 870232
Decision Date | 01 February 1988 |
Docket Number | No. 870232,870232 |
Citation | 418 N.W.2d 781 |
Parties | Doris COURCHENE, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the Estate of ValJean Courchene, Deceased, and Kim Courchene, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. DELANEY DISTRIBUTORS, INC., a North Dakota Corporation, and Mitchel Larson d/b/a Larson Welding, Defendants and Appellees. Civ. |
Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Edward J. Bosch, Minot, for plaintiffs and appellants.
Rolfstad, Winkjer, McKennett and Stenehjem, PC, Williston, for defendants and appellees; argued by Mark L. Stenehjem.
Plaintiff Doris Courchene, individually and as the personal representative of the estate of ValJean Courchene, appeals from a judgment entered in Williams County District Court. The judgment dismissed Courchenes' complaint against defendants Delaney Distributors, Inc. (Delaney) and Mitchel Larson, d/b/a Larson Welding (Larson).
The Courchenes' complaint alleged, inter alia, that ValJean and Kim Courchene were employees of the defendants when a fire erupted in Delaney's warehouse; that the proximate cause of ValJean Courchene's death and Kim Courchene's injuries was defendants' negligence; and that defendants' failure to comply with certain sections of Chapter 65-04, N.D.C.C., relating to Workmen's Compensation benefits, allows the Courchenes to sue defendants in a civil action rather than file a claim with the North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau.
In his answer, defendant Larson denied that the Courchenes were employed by him. Larson also filed a cross-claim 1 against Delaney for the personal injuries he sustained while working in Delaney's building during the fire. In dismissing the Courchenes' complaint, the district court ruled the Courchenes "shall look solely to the North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Act."
The June 15, 1987, judgment made no reference to Larson's cross-claim against Delaney. A letter signed by Larson's attorney dated November 5, 1987, indicates that the district court has not "ruled upon in any way" Larson's cross-claim against Delaney. No Rule 54(b), N.D.R.Civ.P., order has been filed in this case. We therefore remand this case to the district court pursuant to Rule 35(b) of the North Dakota Rules of Appellate Procedure which allows us to retain jurisdiction of an appeal while remanding the case to the trial court for determination of an unresolved legal issue.
As the district court's judgment did not dispose of Larson's cross-claim against Delaney, we remand the record but retain jurisdiction of this appeal pursuant to Rule 35(b), N.D.R.App.P. We respectfully request the district court to expeditiously consider the propriety of issuing a Rule 54...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Estate of Stuckle, Matter of
...county court to consider making a Rule 54(b) determination and direction. We have done this occasionally. See Courchene v. Delaney Distributors, Inc., 418 N.W.2d 781 (N.D.1988) and 421 N.W.2d 811 (N.D.1988). But that is not appropriate for every appeal of a non-final decision unembellished ......
-
Gissel v. Kenmare Tp.
...Hospital v. D'Annunzio, 462 N.W.2d 652, 653 (N.D.1990) ], that would justify employing the procedure adopted in Courchene v. Delaney Distributors, Inc., 418 N.W.2d 781 (N.D.1988), where we remanded the record for purposes of permitting the trial court to consider the propriety of issuing a ......
-
Jerry Harmon Motors, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 880298
...35, N.D.R.App.P., in order for the trial court to designate the trial site to make this case ripe for review. Courchene v. Delaney Distributors, Inc., 418 N.W.2d 781 (N.D.1988); State Bank of Kenmare v. Lindberg, 434 N.W.2d 347 (N.D.1989). Any party objecting to the designated trial site sh......
-
Nesvig v. Anderson Bros. Const. Co. of Brainerd, 920070
...N.W.2d 347, 348 (N.D.1989); In re Estate of Stuckle, 427 N.W.2d 96, 103 (N.D.1988), (Meschke, J., concurring); Courchene v. Delaney Distributors, Inc., 418 N.W.2d 781 (N.D.1988). Ordinarily, we employ this procedure with caution, and consider its use appropriate only where "unusual circumst......