Court Opinion

ID: 9734785
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 17:46:04.000711+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:51.318129
License: Public Domain

PEDERSON, Justice,
concurring specialty-
At oral argument counsel stated that this appeal is governed by Rule 52(a), NDRCivP. The briefing and oral argument did not otherwise relate to any specific finding of fact made by the trial court. I am satisfied that a few dismissals of appeals would cure some of the ailments of the judicial system. Nevertheless, the results reached by Justice Paulson, after a good deal of de novo consideration, provide substantial justice. I would have preferred to remand to permit the trial court to recompute the amount of damages. Rule 59(b)(5), NDRCivP, suggests that we should give the winner the choice of a reduction or a new trial.