M.B. v. Konenkamp
South Dakota Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAmundson, Justice
Konenkamp was dealing with a repeat juvenile offender who resided in a dysfunctional home. The minor had previously expressed concern regarding M.B.’s drinking habits. Konenkamp was making a valiant effort to address the custodial parent’s drinking problem; namely, returning the minor to a sober home. In an attempt to provide such an environment, Konenkamp entered the protection order under the provisions of SDCL 26-7A-107(8). The language of this section provides that such an order may “require” a parent to participate in treatment. The definition of “require” is the imposition of a command…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- At & T Information Systems v. South Dakota State Board of EqualizationSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1987
- Wilson v. WestCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1986