Lithun v. DuPaul ( 1994 )

PER CURIAM.

Michael DuPauI appeals from a judgment severely restricting his visitation. He alleges that the court violated his constitutional rights by the restrictions it imposed. Given the facts, however, authority does not support his claims. Dschaak v. Dschaak, 479 N.W.2d 484 (N.D.1992); Lithun v. DuPaul, 449 N.W.2d 810 (N.D.1989); Lithun v. DuPaul, 447 N.W.2d 297 (N.D.1989); C.B.D. v. W.E.B., 298 N.W.2d 493 (N.D.1980). We summarily affirm the district court’s ruling pursuant to NDRAppP 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

VANDE WALLE, C.J., and NEUMANN, LEVINE, SANDSTROM and MESCHKE, JJ., concur.