Legal Opinion
Wiedmann v. Merillat Industries
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided February 28, 2001No. NonePublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GILBERTSON, Justice.
[¶ 1.] Lyle Wiedmann (Wiedmann) injured his back while working for Merillat Industries (Merillat). Wiedmann’s petition for odd-lot benefits was denied. The circuit court affirmed the Department of Labor’s denial because Wiedmann had refused to participate in a pain management program. We affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
[¶ 2.] Wiedmann began working for Merillat in June of 1987. He injured his back while working on March 21,1994, and reported the injury to his supervisor. For the first month after the injury, Wiedmann continued to work his usual twelve-hour shifts, despite…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sopko v. C & R Transfer Co., Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
- Johnson v. Albertson'sSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
- Kester v. Colonial Manor of CusterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
- Goebel v. Warner TransportationSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
- Schlenker v. Boyd's Drug MartSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. BlairSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
- Haynes v. FordSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
- Meligan v. Department of Revenue & RegulationSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
- Convenience Center, Inc. v. ColeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
- Meligan v. Department of Revenue & RegulationSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.