Legal Opinion
City of Sioux Falls v. Miller
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided November 4, 1992No. 17711PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WUEST, Justice.
The City of Sioux Palls (City) brought an action against the Millers, Arnold and Pansy (the Millers), for violating the City’s zoning ordinance. The Millers counterclaimed for continuing flood damage to their business, allegedly caused by City’s *117raising a nearby street grade and replacing a ditch and culvert system with narrow and inadequate storm sewers which collected and discharged surface water onto the Millers’ property. The counterclaim was based primarily on the theories of nuisance and inverse condemnation. The trial court set City’s claim for trial and granted City’s…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Harrisonville v. W. S. Dickey Clay Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Baker v. Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport AuthorityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Spaulding v. CameronCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Taggart v. Ford Motor Credit Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
- Golden v. Oahe Enterprises, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1976
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Schneider National Carriers, Inc. v. BatesTexas Supreme Court · 2004
- Russo Farms, Inc. v. Vineland Board of EducationSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1996
- Jacques v. Pioneer Plastics, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Horne v. CrozierSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
- Provident Mutual Life Insurance v. City of AtlantaDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1994
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.