Opinion
No. 20160442
07-19-2017
Tara Dawn RITTER, n/k/a Tara McDonald, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Joshua Daniel RITTER, Defendant and Appellant and State of North Dakota, Statutory Real Party in Interest
Elizabeth A. Elsberry (argued) and Christopher E. Rausch (appeared), Bismarck, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee. Suzanne M. Schweigert (argued) and Annique M. Lockard (appeared), Bismarck, N.D., for defendant and appellant.
Elizabeth A. Elsberry (argued) and Christopher E. Rausch (appeared), Bismarck, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee.
Suzanne M. Schweigert (argued) and Annique M. Lockard (appeared), Bismarck, N.D., for defendant and appellant.
Per Curiam.
[¶ 1] Joshua Ritter appeals a district court's second amended judgment denying his motion for equal residential responsibility. Ritter also appeals the district court's order denying his motion for "clarification and/or modification." We conclude the district court's findings on the best interest factors are not clearly erroneous, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Ritter's motion for "clarification and/or modification," and the district court followed our mandate by holding an evidentiary hearing on remand. Ritter v. Ritter , 2016 ND 16, ¶ 15, 873 N.W.2d 899. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7).
[¶ 2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jerod E. Tufte
Daniel J. Crothers
Mary Muehlen Maring, S.J.
[¶ 3] The Honorable Mary Muehlen Maring, S.J., sitting in place of Kapsner, J., disqualified.