Legal Opinion
Okerson v. Common Council of Hot Springs
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided April 29, 2009No. 24978PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KONENKAMP, Justice.
[¶ 1.] Deborah and Darnell Okerson petitioned the circuit court for a writ of mandamus to compel the Common Council of the City of Hot Springs, the Mayor and City Finance Officer (collectively Council) to submit to the voters a referendum on the settlement of a lawsuit concerning the construction of an addition to the golf course in the City of Hot Springs. The circuit court denied the writ. Because the stipulated facts presented to the circuit court do not support the grant of the writ, we affirm.
Background
[¶ 2.] The parties determined that no evidentiary hearing was…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Oakman v. City of EvelethSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
- Sorrels v. Queen of Peace HospitalSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
- Argus Leader v. HagenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007
- Black Hills Central Railroad v. City of Hill CitySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2003
- Green Oak Township v. MunzelMichigan Court of Appeals · 2003
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Klutman v. Sioux Falls StormSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
- Matter of Discipline of RussellSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
- Preserve French Creek v. Custer CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2024
- Okerson v. COMMON COUNCIL OF HOT SPRINGSSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
- Respect the Promise in Opposition to R-14-02-Neighbors for a Better Glendale v. HannaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.