Cowan v. Slann, et al., 20250367

Cowan sued CHI and others for medical malpractice after surgery allegedly was performed on the wrong foot, and Dr. Slann settled before trial. 1
A jury awarded Cowan economic and noneconomic damages and assigned 65% fault to CHI and 35% to Dr. Slann. 2
The district court reduced noneconomic damages to the $500,000 statutory cap, then entered an amended judgment including damages, interest, costs, and disbursements. 3
CHI paid the amended judgment and postjudgment interest, and Cowan accepted payment and filed a satisfaction stating the amended judgment was fully satisfied. 4
Cowan appealed the cap’s constitutionality, and CHI filed a conditional cross-appeal challenging the damages allocation if appellate jurisdiction existed. 5

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Did Cowan waive appeal by accepting payment of the amended judgment? 6	Cowan accepted undisputed amounts and preserved her challenge to the capped noneconomic damages.	CHI argued Cowan accepted full payment and filed satisfaction, waiving appeal.	Yes; Cowan’s full acceptance without reservation waived appeal. 7
Does the noncompliant satisfaction prevent waiver or preserve jurisdiction? 8	The filed satisfaction was not formally valid, so no satisfaction of record existed.	CHI said the defective satisfaction still showed voluntary acquiescence.	The defect did not save the appeal; the record showed voluntary acceptance of full payment. 9
May CHI’s conditional cross-appeal proceed? 10	Cowan argued CHI could not create jurisdiction through a conditional cross-appeal.	CHI said its cross-appeal mattered if the court reached the merits.	No; the appeal was dismissed, so the cross-appeal was unnecessary. 11

Nodak Mut. Ins. Co. v. Stegman, 647 N.W.2d 133 (N.D. 2002) (a satisfaction of judgment must be notarized or otherwise authenticated 12)
In re Rose Henderson Peterson Min. Tr., 974 N.W.2d 372 (N.D. 2022) (voluntary payment or satisfaction generally waives appeal; exceptions for independent benefits and incidental costs 13)
Schwab v. Zajac, 823 N.W.2d 737 (N.D. 2012) (coercion defeats waiver and payment of a judgment creates a presumption of voluntariness 14)
Ramsey Fin. Corp. v. Haugland, 719 N.W.2d 346 (N.D. 2006) (voluntary acquiescence in a judgment can waive appeal without formal satisfaction 15)
Bangen v. Bartelson, 553 N.W.2d 754 (N.D. 1996) (accepting substantial benefits generally waives appeal, subject to exceptions 16)
Sulsky v. Horob, 357 N.W.2d 243 (N.D. 1984) (summarizes exceptions to the acceptance-of-benefits rule 17)
Lyon v. Ford Motor Co., 604 N.W.2d 453 (N.D. 2000) (satisfied judgment leaves nothing for appellate review; acceptance-of-benefits rule is limited outside divorce 18)
Fercho v. Fercho, 982 N.W.2d 540 (N.D. 2022) (acceptance-of-benefits waiver largely does not apply in divorce cases, not nondivorce cases 19)
Tyler v. Shea, 61 N.W. 468 (N.D. 1894) (appeal may survive if the benefit cannot be affected by reversal; abrogated to the extent inconsistent 20)