due to insufficient service of process. In August 2005, the district court dismissed Sanderson’s complaint without prejudice against all the de fendants, concluding there was insufficient service of process. II [¶ 4] Before addressing the merits of Sanderson’s appeal, we must first consider whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear his appeal. Sanderson’s Notice of Appeal purports to appeal from the August 1, 2005, Order of Dismissal and Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment. With regard to the Order of Dismissal for Judge Geiger, a subsequent judgment was entered on August.22, 2005. No judgment was entered upon the Order Granting Summary Judgment for Walsh County, Thomas, and Martens. Because there was a subsequent consistent judg ian Ass’n, 2001 ND 139, ¶ 12, 632 N.W.2d 407 (<HOLDING>); Triple Quest, Inc. v. Cleveland Gear Co.,
holding that plaintiffs dismissal of personal injury action and subsequent dismissal of declaratory judgment action concerning extent of tortfeasors insurance coverage did not trigger double dismissal rule holding that a dismissal on limitations grounds is a judgment on the merits holding appealable dismissal on grounds of lack of personal jurisdiction particularly where the plaintiff cannot cure the defect that led to dismissal holding that dismissal without prejudice is final appealable order where no amendment to complaint could cure deficiencies identified by district court holding dismissal for failure to comply with rule 8 was dismissal of entire action which was appealable final order