Court Opinion

ID: 9513683
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:39:04.516045+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:58.206926
License: Public Domain

SANDSTROM, Justice,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
[¶ 46] For the reasons set forth in Part IV of my dissent in Roise v. Kurtz, 1998 ND 228, ¶¶ 32-34, 587 N.W.2d 573, I dissent as to Part V-A of the majority opinion, which allows the award of interest for noneconomic damages. I continue to agree with the reasoning of the Supreme Court of South Dakota and Supreme Court of California, when they disallowed such interest under statutory provisions similar to those we have in North Dakota.
[¶ 47] I join in the remainder of the majority opinion.
[¶ 48] Dale V. Sandstrom