Legal Opinion
Scholl v. Tallman
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided December 10, 1976No. 11863PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WINANS, Justice.
This is an appeal from a judgment against plaintiff based on the affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction. Plaintiff argues that SDCL 57-1-23 requires a contrary result in this instance. We agree.
During 1971 Wesley Scholl, d/b/a Scholl Construction Company, did work for defendants, Clinton and Virginia Tallman, at their request. As of February 18, 1971 plaintiff’s books indicated that the Tail-mans owed $2,927.37. The Tallmans made payments during the course of 1971-72, 1 but as of November 4, 1974, they allegedly still owed $2,077.37. Defendants believed this figure to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Lang v. BurnsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1959
- Eberle v. McKeownSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
- Baillie Lumber Co. v. Kincaid Carolina Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
- Kirkeby v. RenaasSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1971
- Graffam v. GerondaSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Horn Waterproofing Corp. v. Bushwick Iron & Steel Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Jahn v. BurnsWyoming Supreme Court · 1979
- Flambeau Products Corp. v. Honeywell Information Systems, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1984
- County Fire Door Corp. v. C. F. Wooding Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Chancellor, Inc. v. Hamilton Appliance Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1980
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.