Tort Claims Denied Against Mother of Adult Son

 

The SD Supreme Court handed down one decision this morning, holding inter alia:

 

1. Tort claims denied against Mother of adult Son

 

Summary follows:

 

KOENIG v. LONDON, 2021 S.D. 69:  At the conclusion of the underlying criminal proceeding for aggravated assault against a law enforcement officer, this civil action was filed by the injured Highway Patrolman and his wife for damages against the 42 year old shooter (Son) and his Mother.  The claims against the Mother included negligence, negligent supervision, negligent entrustment of firearms, and breach of an assumed legal duty in regard to the Son’s conduct in connection with the firearms.  The trial court granted summary judgment for Mother and the SD Supreme Court affirmed, holding:

 

           [¶50.] The circuit court did not err when it found [Mother] owed no duty to Sergeant Koenig under a general negligence theory because she was not in a special relationship with [Son]. Nor is [Mother]  subject to a legal duty based upon her own conduct because it did not create a foreseeable high risk of harm. The court also did not err when it determined that [Mother]  did not gratuitously assume a duty to supervise [Son].

 

This decision is unanimous (5-0) with opinion authored by Justice Salter.  Former Chief Justice Gilbertson participate in this decision which was orally argued some 14 months ago on Oct. 5, 2020. 

 

This decision may be accessed at

 

http://ujs.sd.gov/Supreme_Court/opinions.aspx .

 

 

two decisions handed down today by SD Supreme Court, both include Dissenting opinions

 

The SD Supreme Court handed down two decisions this morning, holding inter alia: 

 

1. Child sex abuse claim revived on appeal in 3-2 ruling

 

2. Prison sentence upheld by 4-1 ruling

 

Summaries follow:

 

SYRSTAD v. SYRSTAD, 2021 S.D. 67:  The issues in this case, the lower court’s holding and the result on appeal are summarized in the opening paragraph:

 

[¶1.] Marty Syrstad brought suit against her father-in-law, Michael Syrstad, alleging claims of alienation of affection and child sex abuse. This appeal concerns Marty’s claim of child sex abuse, which the circuit court dismissed on summary judgment after concluding that Marty failed to timely bring suit.  Marty appeals, asserting that the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment. We reverse and remand.

 

The Court’s decision is a 3-2 ruling, with the majority opinion authored by Justice DeVaney (writing on re-assignment), with Chief Justice Jensen and Justice Salter concurring. Justice Kern authored a dissent, in which Justice Myren concurs. 

 

This case involves the 3 year statute of limitations found in SDCL 26-10-25 (damages for injury due to childhood sexual abuse).  The differences between the majority and dissent evolve from the determination, as presented in the context of a summary judgment proceeding, as to:

 

[W]hen a claimant ‘discovered or reasonably should have discovered’ the causation of an alleged injury or condition.

 

 

STATE v. GUZIAK, 2021 S.D. 68:  Defendant was arrested because of injuries inflicted on her infant son and related drug possession.  Pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant pled guilty to 2 felonies with the understanding that the State would recommend a suspended execution of sentence and a cap of 180 days in jail.  Trial court imposed a 12 year prison sentence, with 8 years suspended.  Defendant appeals,

 

arguing that the State’s comments at sentencing breached its implied obligation of good faith under the terms of the plea agreement.

 

The SD Supreme Court affirmed in a 4-1 ruling, with the Court’s opinion authored by Chief Justice Jensen.  Justice Myren dissented.

 

These decisions may be accessed at

 

http://ujs.sd.gov/Supreme_Court/opinions.aspx .

Termination of Parental Rights for 3 Indian Children Affirmed

The SD Supreme Court handed down one decision this morning:

 

1. Termination of Parental Rights of 3 Indian Children Affirmed

 

Summary follows:

 

INTEREST OF A.A., A.T., AND A.A., 2021 S.D. 66: The trial court processed an A & N proceeding, eventually terminating the parental rights of both parents for three “Indian children.”  The trial court acknowledged the application of ICWA and made findings consistent with ICWA requirements. Only the Father appeals.  The SD Supreme Court affirmed in a unanimous (5-0) ruling, with opinion authored by Justice Salter.  The concluding paragraph of the Court’s opinion, ¶ 51, summarizes the Court’s resolution of the issues on appeal:

 

Although the circuit court erred when it signed its findings and conclusions prior to the expiration of the required five-day period, the error did not prejudice Father. He was able to raise the issues presented in his objections and alternative proposals in this appeal. The circuit court did not err in determining beyond a reasonable doubt that DSS provided active efforts to prevent the breakup of the Indian family and in finding that Father’s custody of the Children would result in serious emotional or physical harm. Finally, the circuit court did not clearly err when it found that the termination of Father’s parental rights was the least restrictive alternative.

 

Former Chief Justice Gilbertson sat on this case which was submitted on the briefs on 2/16/21, before Justice Myren was appointed to the Court. 

 

This decision may be accessed at

 

http://ujs.sd.gov/Supreme_Court/opinions.aspx .