If you only remember one point about filing a lawsuit without a lawyer in North Dakota, remember this: North Dakota calls the opening paper a complaint. Self-represented parties file in District Court. Individuals may appear pro se. Entities generally need North Dakota counsel. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure. E-filing: Odyssey File & Serve (North Dakota). Self-represented parties may e-file in District Court; small claims remains clerk-assisted and form-driven. Service: N.D.R.Civ.P. 4. Small claims: small-claims court (District Court) (generally up to $15,000).
Can you litigate pro se in North Dakota?
Individuals may appear pro se. Entities generally need North Dakota counsel.
Pro se (sometimes in propria persona or self-represented) means you speak for yourself. Courts often construe pro se papers liberally on formatting, but they do not invent claims you failed to plead, excuse missed statutes of limitation, or waive service defects. If a corporation is on the other side with counsel, you will still be held to the North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure.
North Dakota Courts self-help center publishes civil and small-claims forms.
North Dakota opinions on pro se practice
Earl Leon OWENS, Petitioner and Appellant, v. STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
…ction. [¶ 3] During April and May 1996, Owens filed various pro se motions with the court seeking relief from his conviction and sentence. In July 1996, Owens, acting pro se, filed his first formal application for post-conviction relief. Owens claimed he was denied his right to call witnesses on his behalf to impeach prosecution witnesses, who “gave false information to the Cou…
North Dakota opinions such as Earl Leon OWENS, Petitioner and Appellant, v. STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee are cited where pro se is disputed. The court stated: "During April and May 1996, Owens filed various pro se motions with the court seeking relief from his conviction and sentence. In July 1996, Owens, acting pro se, filed his first formal application for post-conviction relief." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Larry DVORAK, Defendant and Appellant
…D 188, ¶ 6, 569 N.W.2d 451. Criminal defendants who proceed pro se necessarily relinquish many of the benefits associated with the right to counsel, and in order to proceed pro se, they must voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently relinquish the benefits of counsel. Rockwell, at ¶ 8. A defendant need not have the skill and experience of a lawyer to competently and intelligent…
Practitioners open STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Larry DVORAK, Defendant and Appellant when North Dakota pro se turns on the distinction in this sentence: "D 188, ¶ 6, 569 N.W.2d 451. Criminal defendants who proceed pro se necessarily relinquish many of the benefits associated with the right to counsel, and in order to proceed pro se, they must voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently relinquish the benefits of counsel." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Ian August NOACK, Defendant and Appellant
…p.P. 28(b) (emphasis added). [¶ 8] This Court has held “[a] pro se litigant is not granted leniency solely because of his status as such.” State v. Hilgers, 2004 ND 160, ¶ 19, 685 N.W.2d 109; accord Klose v. State, 2005 ND 192, ¶ 13, 705 N.W.2d 809 (concluding an appellant was not entitled to leniency due to his pro se status); Flattum-Riemers v. Flattum-Riemers, 2003 ND 70, ¶…
On pro se, STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Ian August NOACK, Defendant and Appellant speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "P. 28(b) (emphasis added). [¶ 8] This Court has held “[a] pro se litigant is not granted leniency solely because of his status as such.” State v. Hilgers, 2004 ND 160, ¶ 19, 685 N.W.2d 109; accord Klose v. State, 2005 ND 192, ¶ 13, 705 N.W." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
CITY OF FARGO, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Bronson Jamal ROCKWELL, Defendant and Appellant
…at — as your own attorney, what the Court calls proceeding pro se, if you choose to proceed pro se you are held to the requirements of knowing the rules of the Court as any other attorney would be held to. You would be required to make all the decisions and examine witnesses and conduct yourself in accordance with the rules of the Court. THE DEFENDANT: I need someone to help m…
CITY OF FARGO, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Bronson Jamal ROCKWELL, Defendant and Appellant is worth reading on North Dakota pro se because the court put the point in its own words: "Court calls proceeding pro se, if you choose to proceed pro se you are held to the requirements of knowing the rules of the Court as any other attorney would be held to." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
UNITED BANK OF BISMARCK, a Banking Corporation, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Larry J. YOUNG, Defendant and Appellant
LEVINE, Justice. Larry J. Young, appearing pro se, appeals from a district court order denying his motion to “Vacate Sale and Issue Sheriff's Deed.” We affirm the district court’s order and conclude that, pursuant to Rule 38, N.D.R.App.P., an award of double costs and attorney fees to United Bank of Bismarck (United Bank) and Farmers Home Administration (FmHA)…
UNITED BANK OF BISMARCK, a Banking Corporation, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Larry J. YOUNG, Defendant and Appellant is worth reading on North Dakota pro se because the court put the point in its own words: "LEVINE, Justice. Larry J. Young, appearing pro se, appeals from a district court order denying his motion to “Vacate Sale and Issue Sheriff's Deed.” We affirm the district court’s order and conclude that, pursuant to Rule 38, N.D.R.App.P." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Ronald D. BRAKKE and Alice M. Brakke, Plaintiffs and Appellants, the Estate of Jean M. Brakke; And Nancy Bye
…ald Brakke farm on June 18, 1985. The plaintiffs, appearing pro se in the trial court, alleged in substance that the various defendants unlawfully repos *328 sessed the tractor before the expiration of the ten days required by N.D.R.Civ.P. 62(a), 1 and that the defendants’ conduct constituted criminal trespass, armed robbery, assault, conspiracy, a violation of civil rights, an…
Ronald D. BRAKKE and Alice M. Brakke, Plaintiffs and Appellants, the Estate of Jean M. Brakke; And Nancy Bye is worth reading on North Dakota pro se because the court put the point in its own words: "Brakke farm on June 18, 1985. The plaintiffs, appearing pro se in the trial court, alleged in substance that the various defendants unlawfully repos *328 sessed the tractor before the expiration of the ten days required by N.D.R.Civ.P." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Gary L. PATTEN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Valery GREEN, Defendant and Appellee
…0, 1985. *106 Gary L. Patten, Bismarck, submitted on brief, pro se. Valery Green, pro se. GIERKE, Justice. Gary L. Patten filed an appeal from a district court's denial of his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. We hold that the case does not require a reversal of the district court's denial of his motion. In the instant case, the instrument from which Patten attempts to appea…
Gary L. PATTEN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Valery GREEN, Defendant and Appellee is worth reading on North Dakota pro se because the court put the point in its own words: "Gary L. Patten, Bismarck, submitted on brief, pro se. Valery Green, pro se. GIERKE, Justice. Gary L. Patten filed an appeal from a district court's denial of his motion to proceed in forma pauperis." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Walking through North Dakota facts
Use this walkthrough to see which North Dakota authority does the work at each step.
A person in North Dakota wants to sue without a lawyer and has not yet filed anything.
- Confirm you may appear without counsel: Individuals may appear pro se. Entities generally need North Dakota counsel.
- Draft a complaint and file it in District Court. E-filing: Self-represented parties may e-file in District Court; small claims remains clerk-assisted and form-driven.
- Serve under N.D.R.Civ.P. 4. Serve under Rule 4 — personal service or authorized alternatives. File proof of service. Small claims uses simplified claim and service forms.
- Expect discovery under N.D.R.Civ.P. 26–37 govern discovery. A jury demand follows Demand a jury under N.D.R.Civ.P. 38 for eligible claims. Small claims are non-jury.
Missing service or a limitations deadline is not excused because the filer is pro se in North Dakota. The evidence companion is the North Dakota evidence guide.
Role of the judge and the jury
- The judge decides questions of law: what the statute means, whether a pleading states a claim, which evidence is admissible, and how the jury (if any) is instructed. In bench trials and most small-claims matters, the judge also finds the facts.
- The jury decides disputed questions of fact in jury-eligible civil cases when a timely demand is made and any jury fee is paid.
- Demand a jury under N.D.R.Civ.P. 38 for eligible claims. Small claims are non-jury.
Practical tip: decide before filing whether you want a jury. Late demands are often waived. Small-claims paths (small-claims court (District Court)) usually trade speed for no jury and limited discovery.
Pleadings: complaint, answer, and motions
Pleadings are the formal papers that frame the lawsuit. In North Dakota the plaintiff's opening paper is typically a complaint. It should:
- Identify the parties and the court (District Court or the small-claims forum).
- Allege facts that, if true, entitle you to relief under a recognized claim.
- Demand judgment (money, injunction, declaratory relief, or other remedies the court can grant).
- Include a jury demand if you want one and the claim is jury-triable.
The defendant responds with an answer (admissions, denials, affirmative defenses) and/or a motion to dismiss challenging legal sufficiency, jurisdiction, or service. Later motions (compel discovery, summary judgment, limine) are usually not “pleadings” in the technical sense, but they drive most civil cases.
North Dakota pleadings opinions
Hank ALBERS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NoDAK RACING CLUB, INC., Defendant-Appellant
…te statement pursuant to Rule 12(e), NDRCivP. The notice of motion to dismiss stated that it would be based upon the notice, the pleadings, records and file herein and other oral or documentary evidence. Hank Albers responded to the motion to dismiss in writing, dated 27 December 1976, and by motion dated 27 December 1976 moved for summary judgment. He also filed a brief dated…
North Dakota opinions such as Hank ALBERS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NoDAK RACING CLUB, INC., Defendant-Appellant are cited where pleadings is disputed. The court stated: "Rule 12(e), NDRCivP. The notice of motion to dismiss stated that it would be based upon the notice, the pleadings, records and file herein and other oral or documentary evidence." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Lyle M. NELSON, Deceased First National Bank and Trust Co. of Williston, as Personal
…iams County probate documents. The court granted the Bank’s motion to dismiss. II [¶ 4] The district court granted the Bank’s motion to dismiss Solberg’s claim, stating “grounds for dismissal exist as argued in the [Bank’s] Brief.” No further explanation was provided. The Bank argued for dismissal of Solberg’s claim on two grounds. First, the Bank argued Sol-berg failed to stat…
In the Matter of the ESTATE OF Lyle M. NELSON, Deceased First National Bank and Trust Co. of Williston, as Personal is worth reading on North Dakota pleadings because the court put the point in its own words: "County probate documents. The court granted the Bank’s motion to dismiss. II [¶ 4] The district court granted the Bank’s motion to dismiss Solberg’s claim, stating “grounds for dismissal exist as argued in the [Bank’s] Brief.” No further explanation was provided." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Alvin FILLER and Joan Filler, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. Ryan James BRAGG, Defendant and Appellant, and Gary
…mes Bragg appealed from the trial court’s order denying his motion to dismiss and his motion to reconsider. Bragg claims the court lacks personal jurisdiction because of improper service of process. Because the trial court abused its discretion, we reverse and remand. [¶ 2] In August of 1995, James Bragg and Gary Reinhart broke into Alvin and Joan Filler’s (Fillers) garage and…
On pleadings, Alvin FILLER and Joan Filler, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v. Ryan James BRAGG, Defendant and Appellant, and Gary speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "Bragg appealed from the trial court’s order denying his motion to dismiss and his motion to reconsider. Bragg claims the court lacks personal jurisdiction because of improper service of process. Because the trial court abused its discretion, we reverse and remand." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Thompson v. Thompson
Thompson v. Thompson, 2012 ND 15 (2012)
…cember 30, 2010. [¶4] After a hearing on Waupaca Elevator’s motion to dismiss, the district court dismissed American Family’s complaint with prejudice, concluding American Family did not begin the action within the six-year statute of limitations. [¶5] The district court had jurisdiction under N.D. Const. art. VI, § 8, and N.D.C.C. § 27-05-06. American Family timely appealed un…
On pleadings, Thompson v. Thompson speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "After a hearing on Waupaca Elevator’s motion to dismiss, the district court dismissed American Family’s complaint with prejudice, concluding American Family did not begin the action within the six-year statute of limitations. [¶5] The district court had jurisdiction under N.D." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
NANDAN, LLP and Border States Paving, Inc., Plaintiffs and Appellants v. CITY OF FARGO, a Municipal Corporation
…. [¶ 9] In January 2014, the district court granted Fargo’s motion to dismiss. In its Memorandum Opinion and Order, the district court acknowledged the parties submitted affidavits and exhibits outside the pleadings; however, the court stated it did not consider materials filed outside the amended summons and amended complaint. The district court concluded Border States did not…
On pleadings, NANDAN, LLP and Border States Paving, Inc., Plaintiffs and Appellants v. CITY OF FARGO, a Municipal Corporation speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "In January 2014, the district court granted Fargo’s motion to dismiss." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Stephan PODRYGULA and Psychological Services, P.C., Plaintiffs and Appellants v. Angela BRAY and William Bray
…which has since been paid in full. [¶ 5] The Brays filed a motion to dismiss under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), arguing Podrygula failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because the suit was untimely, and the complaint’s fraud allegations were not pleaded with particularity. Podrygula alleges, since Angela Bray’s sentencing in September 2008, it was discovered she…
On pleadings, Stephan PODRYGULA and Psychological Services, P.C., Plaintiffs and Appellants v. Angela BRAY and William Bray speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "The Brays filed a motion to dismiss under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), arguing Podrygula failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because the suit was untimely, and the complaint’s fraud allegations were not pleaded with particularity." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Schmitz v. State Board of Chiropractic Examiners
Schmitz v. State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, 958 N.W.2d 496 (2021)
…ted the North Dakota State Board of Chiropractic Examiners’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Schmitz argues the court misapplied the law. We reverse, concluding the district court erred in its application of Rule 12(b)(6), and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. I [¶2] In March…
On pleadings, Schmitz v. State Board of Chiropractic Examiners speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "North Dakota State Board of Chiropractic Examiners’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Schmitz argues the court misapplied the law." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Krile v. Lawyer
Krile v. Lawyer, 970 N.W.2d 150 (2022)
…f the materials the parties submitted and thereby treat the motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment. She also argues the court erred in dismissing her defamation claims. We affirm, concluding Krile failed to plead a valid claim for defamation. I [¶2] On February 8, 2017, Assistant State’s Attorney Julie Lawyer1 received an anonymous letter concerning a Bismarck polic…
Practitioners open Krile v. Lawyer when North Dakota pleadings turns on the distinction in this sentence: "She also argues the court erred in dismissing her defamation claims. We affirm, concluding Krile failed to plead a valid claim for defamation." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
How to file and serve in North Dakota
Filing
- Choose the correct forum: District Court for larger or complex civil cases; small-claims court (District Court) when your claim fits generally up to $15,000.
- Prepare the complaint (and any required cover sheet, civil case information statement, or summons).
- Pay the filing fee or apply for a fee waiver / indigency finding as North Dakota practice allows.
- Obtain a signed summons (or local equivalent) from the clerk after the case is opened.
Governing procedure: North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure.
Service of process
Filing alone does not start the clock against the defendant in a meaningful way — service does. Authority: N.D.R.Civ.P. 4.
Serve under Rule 4 — personal service or authorized alternatives. File proof of service. Small claims uses simplified claim and service forms.
Defective service is one of the most common reasons pro se cases are dismissed without prejudice (or worse, delayed until limitations problems appear). Keep copies of every affidavit or return.
North Dakota service opinions
Mitchell S. SANDERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant Jonah M. Sanderson and Madelyn R. Sanderson, Plaintiffs v. WALSH
…the court did not err in concluding there was insufficient service of process. We affirm. I [¶ 2] In March 2005, Sanderson attempted to commence an action against Walsh County, Walsh County Deputy Sheriff Bob Thomas (“Thomas”), Walsh County States Attorney Sharon Martens (“Martens”), and District Court Judge M. Richard Geiger (“Judge Geiger”). From the record, Sanderson filed…
Practitioners open Mitchell S. SANDERSON, Plaintiff and Appellant Jonah M. Sanderson and Madelyn R. Sanderson, Plaintiffs v. WALSH when North Dakota service of process turns on the distinction in this sentence: "We affirm. I [¶ 2] In March 2005, Sanderson attempted to commence an action against Walsh County, Walsh County Deputy Sheriff Bob Thomas (“Thomas”), Walsh County States Attorney Sharon Martens (“Martens”), and District Court Judge M. Richard Geiger (“Judge Geiger”)." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Linda OLSRUD, Plaintiff and Appellant v. BISMARCK-MANDAN ORCHESTRAL ASSOCIATION, AKA Bismarck-Mandan Symphony
…laint on the Association was improper. We conclude Olsrud’s service of process on the Association was improper, and we affirm the dismissal of the action but modify the judgment to dismiss Ols-rud’s action without prejudice. I [¶ 2] After the Association terminated Olsrud’s employment, she obtained a February 21, 2006, opinion from the North Dakota Attorney General, which concl…
North Dakota opinions such as Linda OLSRUD, Plaintiff and Appellant v. BISMARCK-MANDAN ORCHESTRAL ASSOCIATION, AKA Bismarck-Mandan Symphony are cited where service of process is disputed. The court stated: "Association was improper. We conclude Olsrud’s service of process on the Association was improper, and we affirm the dismissal of the action but modify the judgment to dismiss Ols-rud’s action without prejudice." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Ronald D. BRAKKE and Alice M. Brakke, Plaintiffs and Appellants, the Estate of Jean M. Brakke; And Nancy Bye
…ing liability, and moved to dismiss, asserting insufficient service of process and that the complaint failed to conform to the “concise” and “short and plain statement of claim” requirements of N.D.R.Civ.P. 8, and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The defendants also asserted that the complaint was frivolous and sought costs, disbursements, and attorne…
On service of process, Ronald D. BRAKKE and Alice M. Brakke, Plaintiffs and Appellants, the Estate of Jean M. Brakke; And Nancy Bye speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "N.D.R.Civ.P. 8, and failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Thompson v. Thompson
Thompson v. Thompson, 2012 ND 15 (2012)
…s period). [¶28] Rule 4(d), N.D.R.Civ.P., governing by whom service of process may be made and how service of process is made both inside and outside North Dakota, also guides our analysis. Waupaca Elevator’s principal place of business is located outside North Dakota, in Outagamie County, Wisconsin. Rule 4(d)(1), N.D.R.Civ.P., states service of process may be made “outside the…
On service of process, Thompson v. Thompson speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "Rule 4(d), N.D.R.Civ.P., governing by whom service of process may be made and how service of process is made both inside and outside North Dakota, also guides our analysis." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
FARM CREDIT BANK OF ST. PAUL, Leo Jr. and Jean Gauderman, and Lee and Raymond Topp, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v
…farm had “belonged to the Gary Stedman family since 1920.” SERVICE OF PROCESS NDRCivP 4 governs civil jurisdiction and service of process in North Dakota. Rule 4(d)(2)(A) authorizes personal service of process “upon an individual 14 or more years of age by ... (ii) leaving a copy thereof at his dwelling house or usual place of abode in the presence of a person of suitable age…
North Dakota opinions such as FARM CREDIT BANK OF ST. PAUL, Leo Jr. and Jean Gauderman, and Lee and Raymond Topp, Plaintiffs and Appellees, v are cited where service of process is disputed. The court stated: "Gary Stedman family since 1920.” SERVICE OF PROCESS NDRCivP 4 governs civil jurisdiction and service of process in North Dakota. Rule 4(d)(2)(A) authorizes personal service of process “upon an individual 14 or more years of age by ..." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Interest of T.H.
Interest of T.H., 2012 ND 38 (2012)
…dual’s agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process; or (v) any form of mail or third-party commercial delivery addressed to the individual to be served and requiring a signed receipt and resulting in delivery to that individual . (Emphasis added.) [¶15] Relying on Sanderson v. Walsh County , 2006 ND 83, ¶ 17, 712 N.W.2d 842, the district court’s anal…
Practitioners open Interest of T.H. when North Dakota service of process turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Emphasis added.) [¶15] Relying on Sanderson v. Walsh County , 2006 ND 83, ¶ 17, 712 N.W." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Michael BEAUDOIN, Plaintiff and Appellant v. SOUTH TEXAS BLOOD & TISSUE CENTER, Defendant and Appellee
…Tissue Center. [3]. I am not an agent authorized to receive service of process on behalf of the South Texas Blood and Tissue Center. [4], On August 19, 2002, I received a telephone call from the company receptionist, who asked me to sign for a document. As it turned out, this document was the Summons and Complaint in the matter of Michael Beaudoin v. South Texas Blood and Tissu…
North Dakota opinions such as Michael BEAUDOIN, Plaintiff and Appellant v. SOUTH TEXAS BLOOD & TISSUE CENTER, Defendant and Appellee are cited where service of process is disputed. The court stated: "Tissue Center. [3]. I am not an agent authorized to receive service of process on behalf of the South Texas Blood and Tissue Center. [4], On August 19, 2002, I received a telephone call from the company receptionist, who asked me to sign for a document." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Roland C. RIEMERS, Plaintiff and Appellant and Jonathan P. Riemers, Plaintiff v. STATE of North Dakota and Douglas
…emorandum and order granting the dismissal for insufficient service of process and on the basis that the claims against Judge Herman were barred by judicial immunity. [¶ 4] Riemers appeals, arguing he served process in accordance with the rules of civil procedure and his claims against Judge Herman should not be barred by judicial immunity. II [¶ 5] Rule 4(d)(2), N.D.R.Civ.P.,…
North Dakota opinions such as Roland C. RIEMERS, Plaintiff and Appellant and Jonathan P. Riemers, Plaintiff v. STATE of North Dakota and Douglas are cited where service of process is disputed. The court stated: "Judge Herman were barred by judicial immunity. [¶ 4] Riemers appeals, arguing he served process in accordance with the rules of civil procedure and his claims against Judge Herman should not be barred by judicial immunity. II [¶ 5] Rule 4(d)(2), N.D.R.Civ.P." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Registering for e-filing
North Dakota's primary electronic filing path is Odyssey File & Serve (North Dakota).
How to register: Register for North Dakota Odyssey e-filing, verify identity, and pay fees or request a fee waiver.
Pro se reality check: Self-represented parties may e-file in District Court; small claims remains clerk-assisted and form-driven.
When you e-file:
- Use PDF/A or the portal's accepted formats; flatten forms before upload.
- Check that party names match the caption exactly.
- Calendar the clerk's acceptance email — a rejected filing is often treated as unfiled.
- Serve other parties under the rules (e-service through the portal may not replace initial service of process).
Discovery
After pleadings, parties exchange information. In North Dakota:
N.D.R.Civ.P. 26–37 govern discovery.
Typical tools:
- Interrogatories — written questions answered under oath.
- Requests for production — documents, ESI, and tangible things.
- Requests for admission — force yes/no authenticity or fact stipulations.
- Depositions — live testimony under oath (expensive; plan carefully if you are self-represented).
If the other side stonewalls, a motion to compel and, later, sanctions motions are the enforcement path. Courts expect meet-and-confer first in most jurisdictions.
North Dakota discovery opinions
Stephen SIMPSON and Sheri Simpson, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CHICAGO PNEUMATIC TOOL COMPANY, Johnson & Bell
…fered serious injury while using the tools. During pretrial discovery, the Simpsons asked Chicago Pneumatic to produce any photographs and video recordings related to the case. Chicago Pneumatic answered that it had taken surveillance videos of Stephen Simpson and all of the photographs and video recordings had been disclosed. A surveillance videotape was introduced into eviden…
Stephen SIMPSON and Sheri Simpson, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CHICAGO PNEUMATIC TOOL COMPANY, Johnson & Bell is worth reading on North Dakota discovery because the court put the point in its own words: "During pretrial discovery, the Simpsons asked Chicago Pneumatic to produce any photographs and video recordings related to the case." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Heather L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff, Appellee, and Cross-Appellant and State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v
…[¶ 3] Before the hearing on Thompson's motion for relief, a discovery dispute arose between the parties. After Thompson requested Johnson's tax and banking records, Johnson moved for a protective order, requesting that Thompson be prohibited from serving him with further discovery requests. Thompson responded with a motion to compel Johnson to provide the requested information.…
North Dakota opinions such as Heather L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff, Appellee, and Cross-Appellant and State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v are cited where discovery is disputed. The court stated: "Before the hearing on Thompson's motion for relief, a discovery dispute arose between the parties." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
DAKOTA BANK & TRUST CO. OF FARGO, a North Dakota Banking Corporation, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Chester BRAKKE
…, 1985. On January 17, Dakota Bank filed a motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 37, N.D.R.Civ.P. Dakota Bank’s motion to compel discovery asked that its requests for admission be deemed admitted, that Brakke be compelled to answer the interrogatories, and that the court impose sanctions, including attorney’s fees, costs, and disbursements against Brakke for failure to co…
North Dakota opinions such as DAKOTA BANK & TRUST CO. OF FARGO, a North Dakota Banking Corporation, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Chester BRAKKE are cited where discovery is disputed. The court stated: "On January 17, Dakota Bank filed a motion to compel discovery pursuant to Rule 37, N.D.R.Civ.P." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Faith KRUEGER, Plaintiff, Appellant and Cross-Appellee v. GRAND FORKS COUNTY, Defendant, Appellee and Cross-Appellant
…s about the district court’s denial of her motion to compel discovery, the denial of her motion for a continuance, the denial of her claim for damages for mental anguish, evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and statements by counsel during closing arguments. We affirm. I [¶ 2] In July 2012, Krueger sued the County for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, trespass to chatte…
Practitioners open Faith KRUEGER, Plaintiff, Appellant and Cross-Appellee v. GRAND FORKS COUNTY, Defendant, Appellee and Cross-Appellant when North Dakota discovery turns on the distinction in this sentence: "s about the district court’s denial of her motion to compel discovery, the denial of her motion for a continuance, the denial of her claim for damages for mental anguish, evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and statements by counsel during closing arguments. We affirm. I [¶ 2" Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Roland RIEMERS, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Heidee HILL, Jason D. Hill, Hannah Hill, Ashley Roesler, and Hailey Marie
…district court thereafter denied Riemers’ motions to compel discovery and to vacate the dismissal of his complaint without prejudice. The court also denied the Hill family’s motion for a default judgment on their counterclaim for abuse of process, but granted them partial summary judgment on the issue of liability. The court said the Hill family provided facts supporting their…
Roland RIEMERS, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Heidee HILL, Jason D. Hill, Hannah Hill, Ashley Roesler, and Hailey Marie is worth reading on North Dakota discovery because the court put the point in its own words: "Riemers’ motions to compel discovery and to vacate the dismissal of his complaint without prejudice." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Meuchel v. Red Trail Energy
Meuchel v. Red Trail Energy, 4 N.W.3d 203 (2024)
…Red Trail after the court denied Meuchel’s motion to compel discovery. We conclude the court did not err in denying Meuchel’s request for information and did not err in awarding attorney’s fees to Red Trail. We affirm. I [¶2] Meuchel is a member and investor of Red Trail, a limited liability company. In October 2021, Meuchel commenced this action against Red Trail after his ini…
Meuchel v. Red Trail Energy is worth reading on North Dakota discovery because the court put the point in its own words: "Red Trail after the court denied Meuchel’s motion to compel discovery. We conclude the court did not err in denying Meuchel’s request for information and did not err in awarding attorney’s fees to Red Trail. We affirm." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Rules of evidence (short tour)
Trials and many motion hearings are decided on admissible evidence, not on what you know happened. North Dakota applies the North Dakota Rules of Evidence. Core ideas:
- Relevance — does the proof make a fact of consequence more or less probable?
- Authenticity — is the exhibit what you claim it is?
- Hearsay — is an out-of-court statement offered for its truth, and if so, does an exception apply?
- Privileges — attorney-client, spousal, and other privileges can block inquiry even when the facts are relevant.
For a full North Dakota walkthrough of hearsay, business records, authenticity, and depositions at trial, read the companion guide: North Dakota Evidence Law: Admissibility, Hearsay, and Authenticity.
Summary judgment and other dispositive motions
Many civil cases never reach a jury. A party may move for summary judgment by showing there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Pro se litigants lose these motions when they respond with argument instead of affidavits, authenticated exhibits, and pinpoint record citations.
North Dakota summary-judgment opinions
Patricia SALTSMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Lisa SHARP, Defendant. and Ed Hasche, Defendant and Appellee
…ustice. [¶ 1] Patricia Saltsman appealed the district court summary judgment and dismissal of her case against Ed Hasche. Saltsman argued the district court erroneously decided Hasche, a landowner, did not owe a duty toward Saltsman as a lawful entrant on Hasche’s land. Saltsman also argued the district court made improper findings of fact to support the summary judgment in fav…
Practitioners open Patricia SALTSMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Lisa SHARP, Defendant. and Ed Hasche, Defendant and Appellee when North Dakota summary judgment turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Patricia Saltsman appealed the district court summary judgment and dismissal of her case against Ed Hasche. Saltsman argued the district court erroneously decided Hasche, a landowner, did not owe a duty toward Saltsman as a lawful entrant on Hasche’s land." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
State v. Tresenriter
State v. Tresenriter, 2012 ND 240 (2012)
…0269 Sandstrom, Justice. [¶1] Ronald Rowland appeals from a summary judgment declaring that 15 deeds executed in the 1950s covering certain Bowman County property conveyed royalty interests rather than mineral interests, and from an order denying his motion to vacate the judgment. Because the deeds are ambiguous and reasonable differences of opinion exist as to the inferences t…
State v. Tresenriter is worth reading on North Dakota summary judgment because the court put the point in its own words: "Sandstrom, Justice. [¶1] Ronald Rowland appeals from a summary judgment declaring that 15 deeds executed in the 1950s covering certain Bowman County property conveyed royalty interests rather than mineral interests, and from an order denying his motion to vacate the judgment." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
Richard D. SPRATT, Plaintiff and Appellant v. MDU RESOURCES GROUP, INC., Dba Montana-Dakota Utilities, Co
…ustice. [¶ 1] Richard Spratt appealed from a district court summary judgment dismissing his age discrimination claim against MDU Resources Group, Inc. (“MDU”). We affirm, concluding Spratt cannot raise new legal theories on appeal and the district court did not err in determining Spratt had failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact that other employees not in the protect…
On summary judgment, Richard D. SPRATT, Plaintiff and Appellant v. MDU RESOURCES GROUP, INC., Dba Montana-Dakota Utilities, Co speaks to the North Dakota dispute in this passage: "Richard Spratt appealed from a district court summary judgment dismissing his age discrimination claim against MDU Resources Group, Inc. (“MDU”)." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Allen PERIUS, Plaintiff and Appellant v. NODAK MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Appellee and Jacob Kessler
…ellee. CROTHERS, Justice. [¶ 1] Allen Perius appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his action against his motor vehicle insurer, Nodak Mutual Insurance Company, for no-fault benefits and for uninsured motorist coverage. We conclude there are disputed issues of material fact about whether Perius's claimed damages were proximately caused by a motor vehicle accident, and we r…
Practitioners open Allen PERIUS, Plaintiff and Appellant v. NODAK MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant and Appellee and Jacob Kessler when North Dakota summary judgment turns on the distinction in this sentence: "CROTHERS, Justice. [¶ 1] Allen Perius appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his action against his motor vehicle insurer, Nodak Mutual Insurance Company, for no-fault benefits and for uninsured motorist coverage." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
John SCHMITT, M.D., Plaintiff and Appellant v. MERITCARE HEALTH SYSTEM, Dakota Clinic, Ltd., and Innovis Health LLC
…ANDSTROM, Justice. [¶ 1] John Schmitt, M.D., appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his claims against MeritCare Health System for defamation, tortious interference with a prospective business advantage, and violation of state antitrust law. We conclude Dr. Schmitt’s conclusory allegations about MeritCare’s conduct and responses to a credentialing questionnaire by a Dickins…
North Dakota opinions such as John SCHMITT, M.D., Plaintiff and Appellant v. MERITCARE HEALTH SYSTEM, Dakota Clinic, Ltd., and Innovis Health LLC are cited where summary judgment is disputed. The court stated: "ANDSTROM, Justice. [¶ 1] John Schmitt, M.D., appeals from a summary judgment dismissing his claims against MeritCare Health System for defamation, tortious interference with a prospective business advantage, and violation of state antitrust law. We conclude Dr." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
Anthony L. DAVIS, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Wade G. ENGET, Defendant and Appellee and Tom P. Slorby, Defendant
…a party due to improper service of process. Enget moved for summary judgment, arguing trial tactics are a question of attorney judgment which cannot be a basis for legal malpractice. Enget supported his motion for summary judgment with the affidavit of Randolph Stefanson, an attorney with experience in the medical malpractice field. Stefanson reviewed the pleadings, the transcr…
North Dakota opinions such as Anthony L. DAVIS, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Wade G. ENGET, Defendant and Appellee and Tom P. Slorby, Defendant are cited where summary judgment is disputed. The court stated: "Enget moved for summary judgment, arguing trial tactics are a question of attorney judgment which cannot be a basis for legal malpractice." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
John S. ERICKSON and Lila C. Erickson, Plaintiffs and Appellants v. Catherine B. ERICKSON, Individually, and in Her
…The district court granted Catherine Erickson’s motion for summary judgment, concluding John and Lila Erickson’s action failed because a constructive fraud claim cannot lie unless it is shown “that the person claiming constructive fraud was misled in entering the contract.” John and Lila Erickson timely filed this appeal. II [¶ 6] John and Lila Erickson argue summary judgment…
Practitioners open John S. ERICKSON and Lila C. Erickson, Plaintiffs and Appellants v. Catherine B. ERICKSON, Individually, and in Her when North Dakota summary judgment turns on the distinction in this sentence: "The district court granted Catherine Erickson’s motion for summary judgment, concluding John and Lila Erickson’s action failed because a constructive fraud claim cannot lie unless it is shown “that the person claiming constructive fraud was misled in entering the contract." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Wong v. State
Wong v. State, 2011 ND 201 (2011)
…led there are no genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment, and did not abuse its discretion in denying their motion for additional time to conduct discovery. I [¶2] In November 2008, KRE received a $2,600,000 loan from Alerus to purchase commercial real estate in Fargo. Marcil and Rosenberg are respectively the chief executive officer and president of TMGI, w…
Wong v. State is worth reading on North Dakota summary judgment because the court put the point in its own words: "I [¶2] In November 2008, KRE received a $2,600,000 loan from Alerus to purchase commercial real estate in Fargo." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
How LawDiver can help
LawDiver is built for researching the same authorities a courtroom expects — not for inventing cites.
- LawDiver search — From this guide page, the search rail is scoped to North Dakota. Search phrases like
pro se,service of process,motion to compel, or your statute number. - Corpus-linked opinions — Every case block above links to a
/casedisplayopinion id that exists in LawDiver's caselaw corpus. Do not paste outside citations into filings unless you have verified them. - Statutes — Where North Dakota codes are mirrored, open the linked statute sections from this article and read the live text before quoting.
- GoodLaw / citator workflow — Before you rely on an older opinion, check how later North Dakota cases treat it.
- Evidence companion — Use the North Dakota evidence guide when you are preparing exhibits or opposing a motion in limine.
- AI research with grounding — Prefer tools that require retrieval from your matter and the LawDiver corpus over chatbots that invent case names.
LawDiver does not file documents for you, give legal advice, or replace a lawyer when the stakes, opposing counsel, or entity-representation rules require one.
North Dakota case law highlights
Use the topic sections above for pro se practice, pleadings, service, discovery, and summary judgment. Re-run LawDiver searches before hearings — new published opinions appear continuously.
Checklist before you file in North Dakota
- Confirm you (not an entity) may appear pro se for this claim.
- Pick small-claims court (District Court) vs District Court based on amount and remedy.
- Draft a complaint that states facts and a legal theory.
- Register on Odyssey File & Serve (North Dakota) (or confirm paper filing is allowed).
- Arrange proper service under N.D.R.Civ.P. 4.
- Calendar answer deadlines, discovery cutoffs, and any jury-demand deadline.
- Research controlling North Dakota cases and the North Dakota Rules of Evidence on LawDiver.
- Consider limited-scope or full representation if the other side has counsel or the claim exceeds small-claims complexity.
Key takeaways
- Individuals may appear pro se. Entities generally need North Dakota counsel.
- Main trial forum: District Court. Smaller disputes often belong in small-claims court (District Court) (generally up to $15,000).
- Procedure: North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure. Opening paper: a complaint.
- Service: N.D.R.Civ.P. 4. Serve under Rule 4 — personal service or authorized alternatives.
- E-filing: Odyssey File & Serve (North Dakota). Self-represented parties may e-file in District Court; small claims remains clerk-assisted and form-driven.
- Pair this page with the LawDiver search rail (scoped to North Dakota) and the North Dakota evidence guide.
Primary search phrases this page targets: file a lawsuit without a lawyer North Dakota; North Dakota pro se; North Dakota Odyssey e-filing; how to sue in North Dakota.
Contents
- What is a statute, case, rule, and regulation?
- Can you litigate pro se in North Dakota?
- Role of the judge and the jury
- Pleadings: complaint, answer, and motions
- How to file and serve in North Dakota
- Registering for e-filing
- Discovery
- Rules of evidence (short tour)
- Summary judgment and other dispositive motions
- How LawDiver can help
- North Dakota case law highlights
- Frequently asked questions
What is a statute, case, rule, and regulation?
Self-represented litigants lose cases when they confuse sources of law. Use these definitions when you research on LawDiver:
| Source | What it is | How you use it in North Dakota |
|---|---|---|
| Statute | A law enacted by the legislature (or Congress) | Creates rights, duties, damages caps, notice periods, and causes of action |
| Case (opinion) | A written decision of a court resolving a dispute | Interprets statutes and rules; binds lower courts in the same hierarchy when it is controlling precedent |
| Court rule | A procedural regulation adopted by the judiciary | Tells you how to plead, serve, discover, and try a case — e.g. North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure |
| Regulation | A rule issued by an executive agency under statutory authority | Matters when your claim involves licensed industries, benefits, or administrative prerequisites |
| Local rule / administrative order | County- or court-specific filing practice | Often controls e-filing mandates, cover sheets, and hearing calendars |
A winning North Dakota theory usually needs all three of: (1) a substantive statute or common-law claim, (2) a pleading that satisfies the civil rules, and (3) admissible evidence under the North Dakota Rules of Evidence.
Frequently asked questions
How do I file a lawsuit without a lawyer in North Dakota?
Prepare a complaint, file it in the correct North Dakota court (District Court or small-claims court (District Court)), pay or waive the fee, obtain a summons, and complete service under N.D.R.Civ.P. 4. Register for Odyssey File & Serve (North Dakota) when e-filing is required or available.
What is the difference between a statute and a court rule?
A statute creates substantive rights and duties. A court rule (such as North Dakota Rules of Civil Procedure) controls procedure — captions, service, discovery, and trial mechanics. You usually need both.
Do I need to register for e-filing?
Self-represented parties may e-file in District Court; small claims remains clerk-assisted and form-driven. Registration steps: Register for North Dakota Odyssey e-filing, verify identity, and pay fees or request a fee waiver.
Will I get a jury?
Demand a jury under N.D.R.Civ.P. 38 for eligible claims. Small claims are non-jury.
What happens in discovery?
N.D.R.Civ.P. 26–37 govern discovery.
How does LawDiver help a pro se litigant?
It lets you search and read North Dakota opinions and statutes that actually exist in the LawDiver corpus, with links you can verify — reducing the risk of hallucinated citations — while you still remain responsible for filing, service, and courtroom advocacy.
Disclaimer
LawDiver publishes this guide for public legal-information and SEO education purposes. It is not a substitute for advice from a licensed North Dakota attorney. Court rules, e-filing vendors, fee schedules, and jurisdictional limits change. Verify every citation and deadline against official North Dakota sources and the live LawDiver corpus before relying on them in a filing.