Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Maasjo v. McLaughlin School District 15-2

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 12, 1992No. 17665, 17673Published

1ConcurrenceSabers, Justice

I would not reach Issues I or II. I would decide this case on Issue III only. The Board is correct that the method of service was defective and deprived the courts of jurisdiction. See Hardy v. West Cent. Sch. Dist. No. 49-7, 478 N.W.2d 832 (S.D.1991); Reif v. Avon Sch. Dist. No. 4-1, 458 N.W.2d 358 (S.D.1990); Middle Creek Sch. *625Dist. No. 18 v. Butte Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 83 S.D. 107, 155 N.W.2d 450 (1968).

SDCL 13-46-3 provides:

Such appeal shall be taken by serving a notice of appeal upon the school board or special committee or any member thereof[.]

SDCL 15 — 6—4(d)(4) provides in part:

The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. LykkenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Hardy v. West Central School District 49-7South Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Middle Creek School District No. 18 v. Butte County Board of EducationSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Reiff v. Avon School District No. 4-1South Dakota Supreme Court · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API