Arnoldy v. Mahoney & Finneman
South Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
GILBERTSON, Chief Justice.
[¶ 1.] Michael and Ann Arnoldy each purchased assignments of judgments against David and Connie Finneman. They used the judgments to redeem land owned by the Finnemans that had been foreclosed. Daniel Mahoney also purchased judgments that he used to redeem the land from Michael. Arnoldys filed this separate declaratory judgment action challenging the validity of the judgments Ma-honey used to redeem from them. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Arnoldys. Mahoney and Finne-mans each appealed. For purposes of this opinion, the appeals are…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Wilson v. Great Northern Railway CompanySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
- Schmidt v. Wildcat Cave, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
- Metcalf v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity CompanyNebraska Supreme Court · 1964
- Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad v. AcuitySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
- Weitzel v. Sioux Valley Heart PartnersSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Andrews v. Ridco & Twin City Fire Ins. Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. RolfeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
- In Re the Administration of the Florence Y. Wallbaum Revocable Living Trust AgreementSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
- Rabo Agrifinance, Inc. v. Rock Creek Farms, FinnemansSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
- L&L P'ship v. Rock Creek Farms, FinnemansSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.