[¶1] Dale Idso appeals from an order finding him in contempt of court. Nancy Idso argues this appeal is frivolous and requests attorneys fees and double costs.
[¶2] On appeal, Dale Idso argues that the marriage between himself and Nancy Idso was invalid and that the district court erred in its property distribution. Dale Idsos brief does not meet the minimum requirements in N.D.R.App.P. 28, nor did he present any argument regarding how the court abused its discretion in making a contempt determination. Under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8), this Court may summarily affirm a judgment if the appellants brief fails to comply with N.D.R.App.P. 28. [¶3] After a review of the record, we are satisfied there is evidence to support the courts property distribution, we are not left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made, and we conclude the findings and distributions were not clearly erroneous.
[¶4] We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (8).
[¶5] Nancy Idso requests attorneys fees and double costs for defending this frivolous appeal. Under N.D.R.App.P. 38, the Court “may award just damages and single or double costs, including reasonable attorneys fees,” if it determines an appeal is frivolous. The two issues Dale Idso raised on appeal were not raised in the district court on Nancy Idsos motion for contempt of court. Having concluded this appeal is frivolous, we award Nancy Idso double costs and attorneys fees in the amount of $1,625.00. Per Curiam.
[¶6] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jerod E. Tufte
Douglas A. Bahr