Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kreps v. Kreps

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided February 10, 2010No. 25073Published

1DissentKonenkamp, Justice

[¶ 44.] Judicial decisions on children’s lives deserve our highest effort. Here is no place for perfunctory procedure. For this reason, I cannot endorse the trial court’s flawed process. Although the court at the close of trial issued an oral decision from the bench, which remarks form part of the written findings, much of the findings the court later signed as proposed by winning counsel reflect not the expression of independent judicial thought but the rhetoric of adversarial excess.

[¶ 45.] If trial courts fail to “make careful study of the suggested findings in all their bearings before…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Harrigan v. GilchristWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  2. United States v. Marvin Leo BeasleyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
  3. Lansford-Coaldale Joint Water Authority, in No. 92-7605 v. Tonolli Corporation Tonolli Canada, Ltd. Ifim International B v. in No. 92-7671Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  4. Fuerstenberg v. FuerstenbergSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Herbert J. Roberts v. Norman M. Ross, JrCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1965

7 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