Mundhenke v. Holm
South Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
GILBERTSON, Chief Justice.
[¶ 1.] William Mundhenke (Mun-dhenke) filed a complaint seeking an accounting, dissociation, and dissolution of a business he claimed was operated as a partnership with Steve Holm (Holm). Holm denied the existence of a partnership and argued that Mundhenke’s complaint was a request for legal relief for which a right to a jury trial existed, rather than a request for equitable relief for which there is no right to a jury trial. The circuit court denied Holm’s request for a jury trial on the issue of whether a partnership existed. Holm appeals. We reverse and remand.
FAC…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. WestoverSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Dairy Queen, Inc. v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- First W. Bank, Sturgis v. Livestock YardsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
- Thompson v. CoughlinOregon Supreme Court · 2000
- Nizielski v. TvinnereimSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Granite Buick GMC, Inc. v. RaySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
- Suvada v. MullerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2022
- Hanna v. LandsmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2020
- Hedlund v. River Bluff Estates, LLCSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2018
- Gibson v. Gibson Family Ltd. PartnershipSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2016
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.