Wagner v. Miskin

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed a $3 million jury verdict for libel, slander, and intentional interference with a business relationship. The court rejected the appellee's motion to dismiss, held that the appellant's claims concerning privilege and Internet jurisdiction could not warrant reversal on the record, and concluded that the district court properly exercised jurisdiction. The court also held that the incomplete appellate transcript prevented meaningful review of several alleged errors.

Holdings

1. A motion to dismiss an appeal under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b) is procedurally improper because civil procedure rules govern district-court proceedings, while appeals are governed by the North Dakota Rules of Appellate Procedure. The court denied the motion and reached the merits.
2. An appellant who fails to provide a complete transcript bears the consequences of that failure, and the Supreme Court will decline to review alleged errors when the appellate record does not permit meaningful and intelligent review.
3. The court did not grant Miskin the requested broad privilege-based relief because Wagner did not allege that he was defamed at the hearing, the record did not show that he claimed damages arising from the hearing, and an absolute privilege does not permit unlimited republication of allegedly defamatory statements.
4. The district court did not err in exercising jurisdiction over Miskin. The available record showed that her website particularly and directly targeted North Dakota and Wagner, a North Dakota resident, and the claims also involved communications and conduct occurring in North Dakota.
5. Miskin could not obtain reversal based on the asserted hearing-related error because she invited any possible error by opposing exclusion of evidence from the hearing and seeking to use that evidence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Wagner's appeal should be dismissed under North Dakota Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) or because it was allegedly frivolous and lacked a transcript.
2. Whether Miskin's statements connected with a University of North Dakota administrative hearing were absolutely privileged.
3. Whether Miskin invited any error concerning the treatment of evidence from the administrative hearing.
4. Whether the North Dakota district court had personal jurisdiction over Miskin for Internet publications and other communications directed toward North Dakota.
5. Whether the incomplete appellate record required the court to decline review of Miskin's remaining assignments of error.

Disposition

affirmed