Court Opinion

ID: 9514169
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:45:02.169852+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:13.139810
License: Public Domain

SANDSTROM, Justice,
dissenting.
[¶ 31] The district court may award spousal support in appropriate cases. See N.D.C.C. § 14-05-24.1. The district court is to consider the Ruff-Fischer guidelines in making a spousal support decision. Routledge v. Routledge, 377 N.W.2d 542, 544 (N.D.1985). “Findings of fact ..., whether based on oral or documentary *274evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.” N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a). “In reviewing findings of fact, we must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the findings. ‘A choice between two permissible views of the evidence is not clearly erroneous.’ ‘Simply because we might view the evidence differently does not entitle us to reverse the trial court.’ ” Reimche v. Reimche, 1997 ND 138, ¶ 12, 566 N.W.2d 790 (citations omitted).
[¶ 32] Here the district court made specific findings on each of the Ruff-Fischer guidelines — each supported by record evidence — and decided an award of spousal support was not appropriate.
[¶ 33] The majority arbitrarily substitutes its judgment for that of the district court.
[¶ 34] I would affirm.
[¶ 35] Dale V. Sandstrom