[Amended effective March 1, 1986; March 1, 1994; March 1, 1997; March 1, 1998; March 1, 2004; March 1, 2011.]
Rule 52 was amended, effective August 1, 1971; March 1, 1986; March 1, 1994; March 1, 1997; March 1, 1998; March 1, 2004; March 1, 2011. A choice between two permissible views of the evidence is not clearly erroneous when the trial court’s findings are based either on physical or documentary evidence, or inferences from other facts, or on credibility determinations. Prior decisions of the supreme court to the contrary are to be disregarded.
Subdivision (a) was amended, effective March 1, 1994, to expressly provide that findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, are not to be set aside unless clearly erroneous. Subdivision (a) was further amended, effective March 1, 2004, to provide that findings of fact in juvenile matters, including referee findings adopted by the district court, are not to be set aside unless clearly erroneous. Prior decisions of the supreme court to the contrary are to be disregarded.
Subdivision (b) was amended, effective March 1, 2011, to increase the time to file a motion to amend findings from 15 to 28 days after notice of entry of judgment.
Subdivision (c) was added, effective March 1, 1994, to track the 1991 federal amendment, by authorizing the court in a non- jury trial to enter judgment at any time that the court can make a dispositive finding of fact on the evidence against any party. A judgment on partial findings should not be entered before the close of evidence unless certification is appropriate under Rule 54(b).
N.D.R.Ct. 7.1, explains the preparation of orders, decrees, findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Rule 52 was amended, effective March 1, 2011, in response to the December 1, 2007, revision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The language and organization of the rule were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules.
Joint Procedure Committee Minutes of April 29-30, 2010, page 14; September 24-25, 2009, page 22, September 18-19, 2003, pages 24-25; September 26-27, 1996, pages 10-12; April 25, 1996, pages 18-19; September 28-29, 1995, pages 17-18; January 28-29, 1993, page 8; March 28, 1985, pages 1-3; January 19, 1984, pages 3-4; November 29-30, 1979, page 14; Fed.R.Civ.P. 52.
CONSIDERED: N.D.C.C. § 27-20-56(1).
N.D.R.Civ.P. 12 (Defenses and Objections–When and How Presented–By Pleading or Motion– Motion for Judgment on Pleadings), N.D.R.Civ.P. 41 (Dismissal of Actions), N.D.R.Civ.P. 54 (Judgment; Costs), N.D.R.Civ.P. 56 (Summary Judgment), N.D.R.Civ.P. 59 (New Trials–Amendment of Judgments); N.D.R.App.P. 35 (Scope of Review); N.D.R.Ct. 7.1 (Judgments, Orders and Decrees); and N.D.Sup.Ct.R. 13 (Judicial Referees).