Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re the Guardianship of the Person & Estate of Jacobsen

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 11, 1992No. 17112, 17113Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWuest, Justice

I agree with the majority opinion the court did not abuse its discretion in appointing the bank as guardian over the estate of Jennie.

I would affirm the trial court on the appointment of Virginia as guardian of the person of Jennie. It must be taken into account the trial court actually viewed the witnesses and judged their credibility. The standard of review is whether the trial court abused its discretion in appointing Virginia as guardian of the person.

The term “abuse of discretion” refers to a discretion exercised to an end or purpose not justified by and clearly against reason and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Herndon v. HerndonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Rykhus v. RykhusSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
  3. In Re Engebretson's EstateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Matter of Estate of HaffermanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
  5. In Re Engebretson's EstateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1942

2 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