O'Daniel v. Stroud Na
District Court, D. South Dakota
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE
KAREN E. SCHREIER, Chief Judge.
Defendants, Stroud NA (Stroud) and Judy Roosa, move to exclude all evidence of plaintiffs claims for lost profit damages or, in the alternative, to prohibit an award of prejudgment interest. Plaintiff, Perle O’Daniel, opposes the motion. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is granted.
DISCUSSION
In his amended complaint, O’Daniel alleges that defendants engaged in negligent misrepresentation, negligent procurement, and fraud and deceit. In each count, O’Daniel asserts that as a result of defendants’ conduct, he…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Pickering v. PickeringSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
- Kobbeman v. OlesonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
- Lazzara v. Howard A. Esser, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Integrity Floorcovering, Inc. v. Broan-Nutone, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
- Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance v. BechardSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1963
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Steineke v. DelzerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
- Flexider USA Corporation v. RichmondDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2021