Buchholz v. Mayo
Buchholz v. Mayo
Opinion
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT DECEMBER 8, 2022 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
Chandi Melissa Buchholz, Petitioner v. Levi Keith Mayo, Respondent and Appellant
No. 20220178
Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Stephanie R. Hayden, Judicial Referee.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Levi K. Mayo, self-represented, West Fargo, ND, respondent and appellant; submitted on brief. Buchholz v. Mayo No. 20220178
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Levi Mayo appealed from a disorderly conduct restraining order entered against him. Mayo broadly contends the district court erred and its decision is unconstitutional and should be reversed. However, Mayo’s brief on appeal is deficient in identifying and raising a valid issue and does not contain the minimum requirements provided in N.D.R.App.P. 28. Moreover, he has failed to file a transcript of the hearing for our review, and the lack of a transcript on appeal precludes meaningful review. See Smith v. Erickson, 2019 ND 48, ¶ 9, 923 N.W.2d 503 (“If the record on appeal does not allow for an intelligent review of an alleged error, we will decline to review the issue.”).
[¶2] Under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8), this Court may summarily affirm a judgment if the appellant’s brief fails to comply with N.D.R.App.P. 28. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8).
[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte
1
Reference
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Disorderly conduct restraining order summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8).