Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In Re the Termination of the Franchise Agreement Between Groseth International, Inc.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided June 14, 1989No. 15944, 15962Published

1ConcurrenceSabers, Justice

I concur specially on the notice issue because Groseth received timely notice of appeal and was not harmed or prejudiced in any manner by the fact that it arrived by “ordinary, first class mail.” Matter of A.L., 442 N.W.2d 233 (S.D.1989); Matter of B.J.E., 422 N.W.2d 597 (S.D.1988). It is a proper matter for statutory interpretation and construction of legislative intent in SDCL 1-26-31. See my writing in Jensen Ranch, Inc. v. Marsden, 440 N.W.2d 762, 767 (S.D.1989). However, the dicta in the majority opinion which implies that a summons and complaint is properly served by “ordinary, first…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Matter of Dependency and Neglect of ALSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Jensen Ranch, Inc. v. MarsdenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
  3. In re B.J.E.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API