Legal Opinion · Dissent

Johnson v. Johnson

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 30, 1980No. 12600Published

1DissentGrosshans, Circuit Judge

I would affirm the trial judge.

I agree that this court’s review of the record is the same as the trial court’s. I further agree that we must interpret the sentence as written and that a modification of the sentence is not to be included in the interpretation of it. The sentence is poorly punctuated. The semicolon is wrong. If we corrected the punctuation without adding or deleting words we would not cure the problem presented by the sentence. I also agree that it is the clear meaning of the words utilized in the sentence which must be considered when attempting to give effect to the mutual…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. City of Sioux Falls v. Henry Carlson Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Jones v. American Oil CompanySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Piechowski v. CaseSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Newton v. EricksonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Weisser v. KropuenskeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929

1 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