Supreme Court of South Dakota.
FISCAL YEAR 1996 (First Quarter) ABSTRACTS OF SUMMARY DISPOSITIONS

Pursuant to SDCL 15-26A-87.1(A), (B), (C), and (D), the Supreme Court may, sua sponte, enter an order or memorandum opinion summarily affirming or reversing the judgment or order of the trial court in actions wherein the criteria as required by those sections are clearly met. SDCL 15-26A-87.1(E) provides that such summary dispositions may not be cited or relied upon as authority in any litigation in any court in South Dakota, except when the decision establishes the law of the case, res judicata or collateral estoppel, or in any criminal action or proceeding involving the same defendant or a disciplinary action or proceeding involving the same person.

Case Docket Date ofTitle Number Decision Disposition
High Elk v. Class …………………. 18870 7/11/95 reversed Sevier v. Potter ………………….. 18848 8/30/95 reversed V.M., Matter of …………………… 18937 9/18/95 affirmed State v. Christians ……………….. 18974 9/18/95 affirmed State v. Miller …………………… 18985 9/18/95 affirmed L.R., Matter of …………………… 18989 9/18/95 affirmed McDowell v. Leapley ……………….. 19023 9/18/95 affirmed Broski v. Broske ………………….. 19039 9/18/95 affirmed Fey v. Fey ……………………….. 19042, 9/18/95 affirmed 19043 State v. Reinwald …………………. 19046 9/18/95 affirmed L.L.L., Matter of …………………. 19053 9/18/95 affirmed Whiting v. Leapley ………………… 19062 9/18/95 affirmed Engel v. Toupal …………………… 19067 9/18/95 affirmed Bowman v. Bowman ………………….. 19070 9/18/95 affirmed Johnson v. Bowman …………………. 19071 9/18/95 affirmed Burt v. Roush …………………….. 19076 9/18/95 affirmed Arbogast v. Oelrichs Sch. Dist. …….. 19113 9/18/95 affirmed Coffing v. Rapid City Regional Hosp. … 19129 9/18/95 affirmed Miller v. State ex rel. Miller ……… 19003 9/18/95 affirmed in part and reversed in part Maxon v. Wrede ……………………. 18917 9/19/95 affirmed Wignall v. Liggett ………………… 18922 9/19/95 affirmed

Page 521