Franciere v. City of Mandan, 945 N.W.2d 251

On August 14, 2017 Franciere and her dog were attacked in Mandan; she requested the police report under North Dakota open-records law and Article I, § 25 of the ND Constitution.
Franciere filed suit on October 24, 2017 seeking declaratory relief, mandamus, costs, and statutory/constitutional remedies for denial of records; she later received redacted then unredacted reports.
After a year with little activity, the district court threatened dismissal; Franciere filed for summary judgment, and Mandan answered asserting affirmative defenses including insufficiency of service and lack of personal jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court previously vacated a district-court mootness dismissal and remanded for a determination on Mandan’s motion to dismiss for insufficient service and lack of personal jurisdiction.
Franciere had served the City by certified mail to the city address; Mandan argued Rule 4(d)(2)(E) requires personal delivery to a governing-board member. Franciere also moved to compel discovery about retention/communication with SPSAM & S.
The district court found service insufficient, dismissed the case with prejudice, and denied the motion to compel; the Supreme Court affirmed dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction but modified it to dismissal without prejudice and affirmed denial of the discovery motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Personal jurisdiction / service of process	Franciere contends service was sufficient (certified mail) and Mandan waived jurisdiction defenses	Mandan preserved jurisdictional defenses; Rule 4(d)(2)(E) requires delivering a copy to a member of the governing board; mailing is not delivery	Service was insufficient; Mandan did not waive the defense; dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction affirmed
Dismissal with prejudice	Franciere argues dismissal with prejudice was improper	Mandan sought dismissal for insufficiency of service	Dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction must be without prejudice; judgment modified to dismiss without prejudice
Motion to compel discovery	Franciere sought interrogatory answers and documents (who approved/communicated with SPSAM & S) as jurisdictional discovery	Mandan and district court treated the remand as limited to deciding jurisdiction on the existing record; discovery requests were unrelated to personal jurisdiction	Denial affirmed; requests did not relate to personal-jurisdiction issue so district court did not abuse discretion
Judicial-bias / misconduct claims	Franciere asserts district-court misconduct and bias	Mandan notes issue was not raised below	Not considered on appeal; claims raised for first time are forfeited

Franciere v. City of Mandan, 932 N.W.2d 907 (N.D. 2019) (prior Supreme Court decision remanding for determination on service/personal jurisdiction)
Sanderson v. Walsh County, 712 N.W.2d 842 (N.D. 2006) (mailing—including certified mail—is not "delivering" under Rule 4 for municipal service)
Riemers v. State, 718 N.W.2d 566 (N.D. 2006) (insufficient service requires dismissal without prejudice)
Smith v. City of Grand Forks, 478 N.W.2d 370 (N.D. 1991) (court lacks authority to adjudicate absent personal jurisdiction)
Solid Comfort, Inc. v. Hatchett Hosp. Inc., 836 N.W.2d 415 (N.D. 2013) (standard of review and burden for challenging personal jurisdiction)
Krueger v. Grand Forks Cty., 852 N.W.2d 354 (N.D. 2014) (district court has broad discretion on discovery; abuse of discretion standard)
Molitor v. Molitor, 718 N.W.2d 13 (N.D. 2006) (issues not raised below, including judicial bias, cannot be raised first on appeal)
Gadeco, LLC v. Indus. Comm’n of State, 830 N.W.2d 535 (N.D. 2013) (law-of-the-case doctrine)