Court Opinion

ID: 9685050
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 14:21:55.731545+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:02.006502
License: Public Domain

PEDERSON, Justice,
concurring specialty-
Ordinarily I dissent when this court encroaches on the trial court function of determining matters which involve discretion, or credibility, or the making of findings of fact. In this case, because it involves some extraordinary circumstances, I have concurred in the disposition proposed by Chief Justice Erickstad. I would not want it inferred that this is an invitation to seek, in ordinary domestic relation cases, “revision on appeal in all particulars, including those which are stated to be in the discretion of the court,” as appears to be authorized by § 14-05-25, NDCC. The validity and extent of that authorization has never been argued or researched.