Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bozied v. City of Brookings

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 2001No. NonePublished

1DissentVon Wald, Circuit Judge

[¶ 32.] I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding on its decision to remand for a trial on the issue of foreseeability (section D), and on the holding regarding remedies under a void contract (Section E). I agree with and concur on the majority’s holding regarding the unconstitutionality of the city ordinance (section C). I address only sections D and E.

Circumstances Not Reasonably Foreseeable

[¶ 33.] Did the trial court err in holding the use of change orders violated SDCL 5-18-18.3?

[¶ 34.] This Court’s review of summary judgments is indeed familiar. Summary judgment is authorized…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Simpson v. TobinSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Norbeck & Nicholson Co. v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Connelly v. SherwoodSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Hansen Housing, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Stumes v. BloombergSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API