Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Blake SPOKELY, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Aislynn SPOKELY, Defendant and Appellee State of North Dakota, Statutory Real Party in Interest
[¶1] Blake Spokely appeals from a second amended judgment that modified child support obligations in this divorce proceeding following a review initiated by Aislynn Spokely, n/k/a Aislynn Klein, under N.D.C.C. § 14-09-09.32, and from an order denying his motion for relief from judgment.
[¶2] At the time of his notice of appeal, Spokely failed to file an order for transcripts of the relevant hearings as required by N.D.R.App.P. 10(b)(1)(E). Although Spokely later ordered the transcripts, he did so only after the appellee's brief had noted the failure, more than four months after he filed his notice of appeal. We denied his motion to excuse the tardiness. See State v. Cook, 2014 ND 18, ¶ 6, 843 N.W.2d 1 (declining to review issues when the appellant ordered transcripts only after the appellee noted their absence and more than four months after the appellant filed his notice of appeal). Spokely's failure to timely order transcripts precludes meaningful appellate review of the issues raised on appeal. See id.
[¶3] Without transcripts, Spokely's initial brief contains no citations to the hearing testimony on which his arguments depend. In addition, he cites only one case while invoking the wrong statute and without addressing all of the applicable sections of the administrative code. Together, these failures leave Spokely's brief short of the minimum requirements of N.D.R.App.P. 28(b) and warrant summary affirmance under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8). See Diop v. Altepeter, 2025 ND 196, ¶¶ 2-6, 27 N.W.3d 704 (summarily affirming, in part pursuant to Rule 35.1(a)(8), under similar circumstances).
[¶4] We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8). Because Spokely challenges a child support calculation to which he stipulated and his brief does not meet minimum requirements, we conclude the appeal is frivolous and grant the appellee's request for $5,670 in reasonable attorney's fees under N.D.R.App.P. 38.
Per Curiam.
[¶5] Lisa Fair McEvers, C.J. Jerod E. Tufte Jon J. Jensen Douglas A. Bahr Mark A. Friese
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 20260094
Decided: October 15, 2026
Court: Supreme Court of North Dakota.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Make It a Preferred Google Search Source
Add to GoogleGet help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Answer a few questions and get helpful next steps for your legal issue.