Background

• Mills, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, sues the City of Grand Forks for restitution of fines/fees charged for noncriminal traffic offenses in excess of state-law limits.
• In 2004 Mills was cited for careless driving; municipal court imposed a total fine of $166 after a $151 fine and a $15 hearing fee; district court affirmed; the 2004 appeal was dismissed as not appealable.
• In 2008 Sauby v. City of Fargo held home-rule cities cannot impose excessive fines beyond state-law limits for similar offenses, prompting the City to cease excess charges.
• Mills separately pursued federal litigation (dismissed on pleadings; 8th Cir. affirmed) alleging federal constitutional violations from the City's excessive fines.
• In 2010 Mills filed a state class-action seeking restitution for fines paid in excess of state-law limits; the City moved to dismiss or for summary judgment on res judicata/collateral estoppel grounds.
• The district court dismissed, ruling Mills’s claims were barred by res judicata due to the 2004 state-court proceedings; the court also addressed jurisdictional questions and concluded the prior courts were competent.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Sauby v. City of Fargo, 747 N.W.2d 65 (2008 ND) (home-rule city cannot impose fines exceeding state-law limits)
• Missouri Breaks, LLC v. Burns, 791 N.W.2d 33 (2010 ND) (res judicata/applications thoroughly reviewed)
• Hager v. City of Devils Lake, 773 N.W.2d 420 (2009 ND) (explains res judicata in ND context)
• Riverwood Commercial Park, L.L.C. v. Standard Oil Co., Inc., 729 N.W.2d 101 (2007 ND) (preclusion effects of res judicata)
• Laib v. Laib, 780 N.W.2d 660 (2010 ND) (claims that could have been raised are barred)
• Waltman v. Austin, 142 N.W.2d 517 (1966 ND) (limitations of criminal-jurisdictional theory in civil claims)
• Giese v. Giese, 676 N.W.2d 794 (2004 ND) (court jurisdiction required for valid order; not dependent on correctness)