23 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1987–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by South Dakota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2001State v. Jones, 416 N.W.2d 875, 878 (S.D.1987)(citing State v. Olson, 408 N.W.2d 748, 752 (S.D.1987))(further citations omitted). 2001State v. Jones, 416 N.W.2d 875, 878 (S.D.1987)(citing State v. Olson, 408 N.W.2d 748, 752 (S.D.1987))(further citations omitted). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Hallgreen2 sentences1996Jones, as the party claiming error, had the responsibility to insure that a record was made. [State v.] Olson, 408 N.W.2d [748,] 752 [ (SD 1987) ]; State v. Hall, 272 N.W.2d 308, 311 (S.D.1978); Schurman v. Schurman, 60 S.D. 489, 492 , 245 N.W. 39, 40 (1932). 1996State v. Olson, 408 N.W.2d 748, 752 (S.D.1987); State v. Hall, 272 N.W.2d 308, 311 (S.D.1978); Schunnan v. Schurman, 60 S.D. 489, 492 , 245 N.W. 39, 40 (1932); see also State v. Garton, 390 N.W.2d 61, 63 (S.D.1986); State v. Wilson, 297 N.W.2d 477, 482 (S.D. 1980). | 3 | 3 |
Schurman v. Schurmangreen2 sentences1996Jones, as the party claiming error, had the responsibility to insure that a record was made. [State v.] Olson, 408 N.W.2d [748,] 752 [ (SD 1987) ]; State v. Hall, 212 N.W.2d 308, 311 (S.D.1978); Schurman v. Schurman, 60 S.D. 489, 492 , 245 N.W. 39, 40 (1932). 1996Jones, as the party claiming error, had the responsibility to insure that a record was made. [State v.] Olson, 408 N.W.2d [748,] 752 [ (SD 1987) ]; State v. Hall, 212 N.W.2d 308, 311 (S.D.1978); Schurman v. Schurman, 60 S.D. 489, 492 , 245 N.W. 39, 40 (1932). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Olsongreen2 sentences2001State v. Jones, 416 N.W.2d 875, 878 (S.D.1987)(citing State v. Olson, 408 N.W.2d 748, 752 (S.D.1987))(further citations omitted). 2001State v. Jones, 416 N.W.2d 875, 878 (S.D.1987)(citing State v. Olson, 408 N.W.2d 748, 752 (S.D.1987))(further citations omitted). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Wilsongreen2 sentences1996See also State v. Garton, 390 N.W.2d 61, 63 (S.D.1986); State v. Wilson, 297 N.W.2d 477, 482 (S.D.1980). 1996See also State v. Garton, 390 N.W.2d 61, 63 (S.D.1986); State v. Wilson, 297 N.W.2d 477, 482 (S.D.1980). | 2 | 3 |
State v. Gartongreen2 sentences1996See also State v. Garton, 390 N.W.2d 61, 63 (S.D.1986); State v. Wilson, 297 N.W.2d 477, 482 (S.D.1980). 1996See also State v. Garton, 390 N.W.2d 61, 63 (S.D.1986); State v. Wilson, 297 N.W.2d 477, 482 (S.D.1980). | 2 | 2 |
Matter of KABEgreen2 sentences1993In re K.A.B.E., 325 N.W.2d 840, 844 (S.D.1982); AM., 292 N.W.2d at 105 . 1993In re K.A.B.E., 325 N.W.2d 840, 844 (S.D.1982); A.M., 292 N.W.2d at 105 . | 2 | 2 |
Shamburger v. Behrensgreen2 sentences1994The party claiming error must show a clear abuse of discretion, Zepp v. Hofmann, 444 N.W.2d 28, 31 (S.D.1989), and prejudicial error, Shamburger v. Behrens, 380 N.W.2d 659, 661 (S.D. 1986). 1994The party claiming error must show a clear abuse of discretion, Zepp v. Hofmann, 444 N.W.2d 28, 31 (S.D.1989), and prejudicial error, Shamburger v. Behrens, 380 N.W.2d 659, 661 (S.D.1986). | 1 | 2 |
Application of Novaockgreen2 sentences1999See In re Novaock, 1998 SD 3, ¶ 10 , 572 N.W.2d 840, 843 (the burden is on the party claiming error to establish that the error was prejudicial). 1999See In re Novaock, 1998 SD 3, ¶ 10 , 572 N.W.2d 840, 843 (the burden is on the party claiming error to establish that the error was prejudicial). | 1 | 1 |
Zepp v. Hofmanngreen2 sentences1994The party claiming error must show a clear abuse of discretion, Zepp v. Hofmann, 444 N.W.2d 28, 31 (S.D.1989), and prejudicial error, Shamburger v. Behrens, 380 N.W.2d 659, 661 (S.D. 1986). 1994The party claiming error must show a clear abuse of discretion, Zepp v. Hofmann, 444 N.W.2d 28, 31 (S.D.1989), and prejudicial error, Shamburger v. Behrens, 380 N.W.2d 659, 661 (S.D.1986). | 1 | 1 |
Sioux Enterprises, Minnesota v. Tri-State Refining Co.green1 sentence1994SDCL 15-26A-48; Sioux Enterprises v. Tri-State Refining, 456 N.W.2d 774, 777 (S.D.1990). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Andrews
green
2 sentences2018"This Court has repeatedly instructed that the party claiming error carries the responsibility of ensuring an adequate record for review." State v. Andrews , 2007 S.D. 29 , ¶ 9, 730 N.W.2d 416 , 420. 2018“This Court has repeatedly instructed that the party claiming error carries the responsibility of ensuring an adequate record for review.” State v. Andrews, 2007 S.D. 29 , ¶ 9, 730 N.W.2d 416, 420 . | 4 | 2009–2018 |
Matter of AM
green
2 sentences1993In re K.A.B.E., 325 N.W.2d 840, 844 (S.D.1982); AM., 292 N.W.2d at 105 . 1993In re K.A.B.E., 325 N.W.2d 840, 844 (S.D.1982); A.M., 292 N.W.2d at 105 . | 2 | 1993–1993 |
Okerson v. COMMON COUNCIL OF HOT SPRINGS
green
2 sentences2009This Court has repeatedly instructed that the party claiming error carries the responsibility of ensuring an adequate record *454 for review.” Okerson v. Common Council of the City of Hot Springs, 2009 SD 30, ¶ 8 , 767 N.W.2d 531 (citation omitted). [¶ 37.] Through recent rule changes this Court has encouraged parties to include an appendix containing the documents necessary to resolve appeals. 11 Nevertheless, an appendix is not a substitute for designating and submitting the record on appeal. 2009This Court has repeatedly instructed that the party claiming error carries the responsibility of ensuring an adequate record *454 for review.” Okerson v. Common Council of the City of Hot Springs, 2009 SD 30, ¶ 8 , 767 N.W.2d 531 (citation omitted). [¶ 37.] Through recent rule changes this Court has encouraged parties to include an appendix containing the documents necessary to resolve appeals. 11 Nevertheless, an appendix is not a substitute for designating and submitting the record on appeal. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Cates
green
2 sentences2007State v. Cates, 2001 SD 99, ¶ 18 , 632 N.W.2d 28, 36 . 2007State v. Cates, 2001 SD 99, ¶ 18 , 632 N.W.2d 28, 36 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Tjeerdsma v. Global Steel Buildings, Inc.
green
1 sentence2002Id. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
State v. Boykin
green
1 sentence1991Boykin, 432 N.W.2d at 68 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Psarianos v. Standard Marine, Ltd., Inc.
green
1 sentence1991Psarianos v. Standard Marine, Ltd., Inc., 728 F.Supp. 438 (E.D.Tex.1989); Finkle and Ross v. A.G. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Matter of CM
green
2 sentences1990SDCL 15-26A-48; Matter of C.M., 417 N.W.2d 887 (S.D.1988). 1990SDCL 15-26A-48; Matter of C.M., 417 N.W.2d 887 (S.D.1988). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.