Legal Opinion
Chipperfield v. Woessner
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided March 28, 1969No. File 10587PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RENTTO, Judge.
This is an action for personal injury.
Defendants moved for summary judgment claiming that the plaintiff had not commenced his action within the period of time specified by law for bringing it. On this defense there was no genuine issue as to any material fact. The court being of the view that the action had not been timely brought granted the motion and entered judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint and amended complaint. He appeals.
Plaintiff's complaint claims that on September 16, 1962, the defendant Ray Woessner negligently drove a motor vehicle against him as he was…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- F. M. Slagle & Co. v. BushnellSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1944
- Hinkle v. HargensSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1957
- Fales v. KauppSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
- Busby v. ShaferSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1954
- Durr v. HardestySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1956
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Cunningham v. Yankton Clinic, P. A.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
- Morgan v. BaldwinSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
- Marilyn M. Marshall v. Mikel WarwickCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1998
- Peterson, Ex Rel. Peterson v. BurnsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2001
- State of Minn. Ex Rel. Hove v. DoeseSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1993
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.