Heumiller v. Heumiller
South Dakota Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceZinter, Justice
[¶ 20.] I respectfully disagree with the Court’s reasoning. There is a substantial difference between accrued obligations and past due payments; and SDCL 25-7-7.3 only prohibits retroactive modification of “past due support payments.” (Emphasis added.) The Court, however, reasons that it is “immaterial” that Douglas fully paid his support payments when due; i.e. that he had no past due support payments. Supra ¶ 8. In the Court’s view, the only relevant question is whether any support obligation “accrued.” Supra ¶ 8.
[¶ 21.] “[W]ords in a statute are to be understood in their ordinary sense,”…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Radigan v. RadiganSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
- Vellinga v. VellingaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
- State Ex Rel. Larsgaard v. LarsgaardSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1980
- Stach v. StachSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
- Houser v. HouserSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.