(Federal Courts and Other Appellate Courts)
N.D. R. App. P. 47
Joint Procedure Committee Minutes of April 25-26, 2002, page 27.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
Rule 47 was amended, effective 3/1/1996;3/1/2003;10/1/2014.
Rule 47 is substantially the same as the 1967 Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act as drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Rule 47 was revised, effective3/1/2003. 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. The following comments are based upon the official Comments to the Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act. This rule provides that the supreme court has the right to answer questions certified to it; it is not mandatory that the court answer certified questions. See, for example, Atlas Life Insurance Co. v. W. I. Southern, Inc., 306 U. S. 563, 59 S. Ct. 657, 83 L. Ed. 987 (1939), and National Labor Relations Board v. White Swan Co., 313 U. S. 23, 61 S. Ct. 75, 85 L. Ed. 1165 (1941) (in both cases the Supreme Court of the United States refused to answer certified questions). The courts listed as the court which may certify questions are the Supreme Court, the federal Courts of Appeals and the federal District Courts, which would include three-judge District Courts under 28 U. S. C. 2281 and 2284. Also included are "the highest appellate court or the intermediate appellate court" of other states. This provision allows certification of questions in conflicts cases. The statement of facts in a certification order should present all of the relevant facts. The purpose is to give the answering court a complete picture of the controversy so that the answer will not be given in a vacuum. The certifying court could include exhibits, excerpts from the record, a summary of the facts found by the court, and any other document which will be of assistance to the answering court. Subdivision (f) provides for incorporation by reference of the local rules or statutes governing briefs and arguments. Subdivisions (h) and (i) allow certifications from the supreme court to the highest court of another state. This could prove to be very useful in the case of conflicts of laws where the supreme court wishes to apply the law of another state. If the law of that state is unclear on the point, a question could be certified. This is the reciprocal provision of subdivision (a). Subdivision (l) is not part of the uniform rule. It was added in 1996 to formalize the procedure for withdrawal of the certification order when the case pending in the certifying court is settled prior to the issuance of the opinion by the supreme court. Rule 47 was amended, effective10/1/2014, to replace "supreme court clerk" with "clerk of the supreme court."
STATUTES AFFECTED:
CONSIDERED: N.D.C.C. §§32-24-01 through 32-24-04.