Kirchmeier v. Hjelle
| Decision Date | 09 July 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 8090,8090 |
| Parties | William KIRCHMEIER, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Walter R. HJELLE, as State Highway Commissioner of the State of North Dakota and W. W. Ferguson, as Director, Safety Responsibility Division for State Highway Commissioner, Respondents- Appellants. |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
The courts of North Dakota are not authorized to give advisory opinions and will not decide moot questions or propositions that have become abstract because of events occurring subsequent to the commencement of the action or where lapse of time prevents the rendering of effective relief except where questions of great public interest involve the authority and power of public officials and the real merits of the controversy are still unsettled.
Rausch & Chapman, Bismarck, for petitioner and respondent.
Helgi Johanneson, Atty. Gen., and Jon R. Kerian, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Bismarck, for respondents and appellants.
On July 30, 1962, an administrative order of revocation of driver's license was made by W. W. Ferguson, Director, Safety Responsibility Division for the State Highway Department, addressed to William Kirchmeier, petitioner herein, directing that all of his licenses and permits be surrendered, including license Number 14282. The order stated:
'* * * that your Operator's License and driving privileges be revoked, effective as of this date, and you are directed and required to immediately surrender and return your license to the Office of the Safety Responsibility Division of the State Highway Department, for a period of six months.'
The record includes a transcript of testimony purporting to have been taken on September 24, 1962 at an administrative hearing before Jon R. Kerian, Special Assistant Attorney General, acting at the request of the State Highway Commissioner as his duly authorized agent, at which hearing Kirchmeier appeared in person and by his attorney, Richard Rausch. At the conclusion of this hearing, Mr. Kerian directed that the order of revocation be continued in force. This transcript was before the trial court and by stipulation was made a part of the settled statement of the case.
On October 1, 1962, the petitioner, William Kirchmeier, filed in the office of the clerk of the District Court of Burleigh County a notice of appeal and petition for judicial review entitled 'In the Matter of the Revocation of Driver's License Number 14282,' in which he asked for a review of the hearing of September 24, 1962, pursuant to Section 39-20-06, NDCC.
We find in the judgment roll an order of the district court dated February 6, 1963, as follows:
'IT APPEARING to the satisfaction of the Court that heretofore a Notice of Appeal and Petition for Judicial Review had been filed herein by Petitioner and on the 2nd day of January, 1963, Petitioner having appeared by his attorney, Richard P. Rausch of the firm of Rausch and Chapman, and Respondents by and through Vernon R. Pederson, Special Assistant Attorney General, and it having been agreed in open Court that the Court could on or after the 31st day of January, 1963, issue its order authorizing the restoration of the driver's license to petitioner, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the Court that Petitioner's driver's license has been continuously held by the Clerk of this Court and is now included in the file herein,
'NOW, THEREFORE, on motion of attorney for Petitioner, and upon the agreement made in open Court, it is hereby ORDERED that Petitioner's driver's license be and the same is restored to him and it is further ORDERED that the above entitled matter be and the same is in all things dismissed.'
This order was filed on February 7, 1963, in the office of the clerk of the district court, and on the same day there was also filed in the office of the clerk a receipt signed by the attorney for the petitioner for the petitioner's driver's license Number 14282. We find no further reference to the order in the record.
It should be noted here that the order directing the return of the petitioner's driver's license and the dismissal of the proceedings was made more than six months after the administrative order of July 30, 1962 revoking the driver's license for a period of six months.
On March...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Olson v. Maxwell
...(which) involve the authority and power of public officials and the real merits of the controversy are still unsettled" (Kirchmeier v. Hjelle, 129 N.W.2d 373 (N.D.1964)), or whether there are "weighty countervailing policies" to justify an exception to the general rule (State v. Gamble-Skog......
-
Gasser v. Dorgan, 9391
...events occurring prior to the appellate court's determination the appellate court is unable to render effective relief. Kirchmeier v. Hjelle, 129 N.W.2d 373 (N.D.1964). The case of Goetz, supra, involved an appeal from an order of the district court denying a stay of execution upon two judg......
-
State v. Katsoulis
...case subsequent events and the passage of time have rendered the judgment impotent. The appeal is therefore dismissed. Kirchmeier v. Hjelle, 129 N.W.2d 373, 376 (N.D.1964). Without determining whether the question: Did the trial court have the authority to commit the accused for examination......
-
State v. Key, 1150
...could have on Key in the future, we conclude that the issue in this case is not moot. The State has also referred us to Kirchmeier v. Hjelle, 129 N.W.2d 373 (N.D.1964), to support its argument that the case now before our Court is moot. We recognize this case but find it distinguishable on ......