Legal Opinion

Du-Al Manufacturing Co. v. Sioux Falls Construction Co.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 9, 1989No. 16518PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HENDERSON, Justice.

CASE SUMMARY

We affirm the trial court’s dismissal for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. Paramount in our decision is the consideration of SDCL 15-6-41(b) and SDCL 15-11-11. Our scope of review, when reviewing a trial court’s grant (or denial) of a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute, is: Did the trial court abuse its discretion? Schwartzle v. Austin Co., 429 N.W.2d 69, 71 (S.D.1988): Duncan v. Pennington County Housing Authority, 382 N.W.2d 425, 426 (S.D.1986); Watkins Products, Inc. v. Lytle, 90 S.D. 122, 124, 238 N.W.2d 299, 300 (1976). We find no abuse of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Duncan v. Pennington County Housing AuthoritySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Schwartzle v. Austin Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Potts v. StarrSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Watkins Products, Inc. v. LytleSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Dakota Cheese, Inc. v. TaylorSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Moore v. Michelin Tire Co., Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Horne v. CrozierSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Devitt v. HayesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Reuben C. Setliff, III, M.D., P.C. v. StewartSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005

17 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