Legal Opinion

Trip-Tenn, Inc. v. Schultz

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided January 22, 2003No. NonePublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GILBERTSON, Chief Justice.

[¶ 1.] Trip-Tenn, Inc. sued Russell and Sandra Schultz (collectively Schultz) for reformation of a contract for deed to collect unpaid principal and interest. The parties entered into the contract in 1977. A discrepancy in the amortization schedule was discovered in 1992. Trip-Tenn, however, did not commence suit until 1999, two years after Schultz claims the final payment on the contract was made. The trial court reformed the contract and awarded Trip-Tenn, Inc., a judgment of $30,955.73. We affirm, concluding the appropriate statute of limitation is the ten-year…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Faircloth v. Raven Industries, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Wolff v. Secretary of the South Dakota Game, Fish & Parks DepartmentSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  3. LPN Trust v. Farrar Outdoor Advertising, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Knudsen v. JensenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Langer v. Stegerwald Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1952

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City of East Chicago v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2007
  2. Hoven v. Banner Associates, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2023
  3. City of East Chicago v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. Owens v. FEM Electric Association, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Owens v. FEM Electric Association, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API