Legal Opinion · Dissent

Owens v. FEM Electric Association, Inc.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 2005No. NonePublished

1DissentGilbertson, Chief Justice

[¶ 29.] I respectfully dissent. I agree with the Court that we conduct a de novo review of a summary judgment on statute of limitations issues where there are no disputes regarding genuine issues of material fact and only the application of the law is in question. See Trip-Tenn, Inc. v. Schultz, 2003 SD 10, ¶ 7, 656 N.W.2d 747, 750. I also agree that the evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Supra ¶ 6. Most importantly in this case, I agree that a motion for “[s]ummary judgment is an extreme remedy and should be awarded only when the truth is clear and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Trip-Tenn, Inc. v. SchultzSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API