The SD Supreme Court handed down three decisions this morning:
1) Undue influence upheld in will contest;
2) Utilization of general verdict precludes appellate
review of issues;
3) $1.5 million verdict upheld
Summaries follows:
MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF
GAASKJOLEN, 2020 S.D. 17: This dispute is between two daughters following the
death of their mother. After father’s earlier
death, mother executed a new will disinheriting one daughter. Disinherited daughter brought this will
contest challenging the new will on the bases of a lack of testamentary capacity
and undue influence. After a 5
day court trial, the trial court ruled in favor of the disinherited daughter on
the basis of undue influence. The
SD Supreme Court affirmed. This decision
is unanimous with opinion authored by Justice Jensen.
SEDLACEK v. PRUSSMAN CONTRACTING, INC., 2020 S.D. 18: Plaintiff
sued for injuries “allegedly sustained while
repairing a crane owned” by Defendant. The issue,
as submitted to the jury, was by a general verdict form. Jury found for Defendant. Plaintiff asserts on appeal that
the [trial]
court abused its discretion when it admonished the jury not to consider
testimony regarding OSHA standards, denied a proposed jury instruction on OSHA
standards, and denied [Plaintiff’s] motion for a mistrial
The SD Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the utilization of
a general verdict form prevents appellate review of the issues framed on
appeal stating in ¶ 22:
Without
special interrogatories detailing the basis for the jury’s determination of no
liability, we are unable to discern the reason for its verdict, which could
have rested on multiple permissible bases. Under the circumstances, we cannot
assess prejudice even if the court abused its discretion. We must therefore
affirm without reaching the merits of [Plaintiff’s] issues.
This decision is unanimous, with opinion authored by Justice
Salter.
EXCEL UNDERGROUND, INC. v. BRANT LAKE SANITARY DISTRICT, 2020
S.D. 19: In this lawsuit involving additional parties, the underlying dispute
is between Brant Lake Sanitary District and Excel Underground, Inc. The jury awarded a verdict of $1,569,691.81 in
favor of Excel and rejected a damage claim for $794,763.56 asserted by the
District. The 9 day jury trial began in April 2018. This case was argued in the
SD Supreme Court in February 2019. Today
the SD Supreme Court affirmed the verdict in a unanimous ruling, with opinion
authored by Justice Kern. The concluding
paragraph of the Court’s opinion, ¶ 22, states:
We affirm
on all grounds. We need not address the District’s claim that the circuit court
erred by granting Excel’s motion for summary judgment on the District’s
liquidated damages claim because the jury ruled for Excel. We affirm the
circuit court’s denial of the District’s motion for summary judgment against
Excel and decline the District’s invitation to adopt the rule endorsed by the
Wisconsin Court of Appeals in Precision Erecting. Further, the circuit
court did not err by instructing the jury regarding the District’s emergency
bidding procedures. Although the circuit court erred by giving the agency
instruction, the District has failed to establish reversible error on this
basis. Finally, the jury verdict was not excessive, speculative, or contrary to
law. Ample evidence exists within the trial record to support the jury’s award
of contract damages.
Retired Justice Konenkamp sat on this case in the vacancy
created by Justice Zinter’s death. Circuit
Judge Clark also sat on this case in lieu of Justice Salter.
These decisions may be accessed at
