The
SD Supreme Court handed down two decisions this morning:
- § 1983
claim against City of Sioux Falls analyzed;
- Challenge to disbursements from Trust rejected
Summaries
follows:
BOGGS
v. PEARSON, 2021 S.D. 44: This is a 1983
action (42 U.S.C. § 1983) filed in SD state court against the City of Sioux
Falls and two of its police officers.
The result at the trial level is described in the opening paragraph of
the Court’s opinion:
[¶1.] In this 42 U.S.C. §
1983 action against certain officers of the Sioux Falls Police Department and the City of Sioux
Falls, the circuit court concluded on a
motion for summary judgment that the officers were not entitled to
qualified immunity because material
issues of fact were in dispute on the questions whether the officers’ warrantless entry into the
plaintiff’s apartment and subsequent use of
force were constitutional. The court further denied summary judgment on
the plaintiff’s claim against the City, determining that material issues of
fact were in dispute as to whether the
plaintiff’s injury was caused by inadequate training, a deliberate indifference, or an errant policy.
The
SD Supreme Court reversed in part and remanded, holding:
[¶44.] The circuit court
erred in denying summary judgment on Nichole’s § 1983 claim that the officers’ warrantless
entry into her apartment violated her
constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
The circuit court also erred in denying
the City’s motion for summary judgment. However, the court properly concluded that material issues
of fact are in dispute on the question
whether the officers used excessive force such that the defendants are
not entitled to qualified immunity as a
matter of law on this § 1983 claim.
The
Court also rejected Plaintiff’s request for appellate attorney fees under the
federal statute as premature. This
decision is unanimous (5-0) with opinion authored by Justice DeVaney.
ESTATE
OF CALVIN, 2021 S.D. 45: Trust was
established by Grandfather for his son, with grandchildren designated as
remainder beneficiaries. At the death of
son, grandchildren filed claim against son’s estate for $700,000 of alleged
wrongful disbursements to son from estate.
Estate of son, allied with step-mother of grandchildren, resisted
claim. Trial court denied the claim,
holding the disbursements were proper.
The SD Supreme Court affirmed in a unanimous (5-0) decision with opinion
authored by Chief Justice Jensen.
These
decisions may be accessed at
