Legal Opinion

Faircloth v. Raven Industries, Inc.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 2000No. NonePublishedCited by 60 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKonenkamp, Justice

[¶ 1.] In this workers’ compensation appeal, we must decide which of two statutes of limitations applies to a claim. The employer contends that the two-year limitation in SDCL 62-7-35 pertains because the employer gave written notice denying the claim. The employee, on the other hand, contends that the three-year period in SDCL 62-7-35.1 applies because the employer previously provided benefits to the employee. The Department of Labor ruled that the claim was barred under the two-year statute of limitations. On appeal, the circuit court reversed, applying the three-year statute. We conclude…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Posadas v. National City BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  3. Simpson v. TobinSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Meyerink v. Northwestern Public Service Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Delano v. PetteysSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by60 opinions

  1. Peterson, Ex Rel. Peterson v. BurnsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Pitt-Hart v. Sanford USD Medical CenterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
  3. Double Diamond Construction v. Farmers Cooperative Elevator Ass'n of BeresfordSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Magner v. BrinkmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
  5. Peters v. Great Western Bank, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2015

55 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