Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
17 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1942–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Crouse v. Crousegreen2 sentences2010See Crouse v. Crouse, 1996 S.D. 95 , ¶ 14, 552 N.W.2d 413, 417 (equitable estoppel is reviewed de novo). 2010See Crouse v. Crouse, 1996 S.D. 95 , ¶ 14, 552 N.W.2d 413, 417 (equitable estoppel is reviewed de novo). | 4 | 4 |
Nelson v. Garbergreen2 sentences2026In other words, “a dedication is express where the appropriation is formally declared[.]” Id. (citation omitted). [¶17.] “A dedication ‘is implied where it arises by operation of law from the owner’s conduct and the facts and circumstances of the case.’ An implied ‘[d]edication is premised on the doctrine of equitable estoppel.’” Nelson v. Garber, 2021 S.D. 32, ¶ 25 , 960 N.W.2d 340, 347 (alteration in original) (citations omitted). 2026In other words, “a dedication is express where the appropriation is formally declared[.]” Id. (citation omitted). [¶17.] “A dedication ‘is implied where it arises by operation of law from the owner’s conduct and the facts and circumstances of the case.’ An implied ‘[d]edication is premised on the doctrine of equitable estoppel.’” Nelson v. Garber, 2021 S.D. 32, ¶ 25 , 960 N.W.2d 340, 347 (alteration in original) (citations omitted). | 1 | 2 |
Even v. City of Parkergreen2 sentences2018When the doctrine is asserted against a municipal corporation, the party asserting the defense must show that "municipal officers have taken some affirmative action influencing another which renders it inequitable for the municipality to assert a different set of facts." Even v. City of Parker , 1999 S.D. 72 , ¶ 12, 597 N.W.2d 670 , 674 (quoting Hoogterp , 85 S.D. at 180 , 179 N.W.2d at 17 ). 2018When the doctrine is asserted against a municipal corporation, the party asserting the defense must show that “municipal officers have taken some affirmative action influencing another which renders it inequitable for the municipality to assert a different set of facts.” Even v. City of Parker, 1999 S.D. 72 , ¶ 12, 597 N.W.2d 670, 674 (quoting Hoogterp, 85 S.D. at 180 , 179 N.W.2d at 17 ). | 1 | 2 |
City of Rapid City v. Hoogterpgreen2 sentences2018"A claim that the evidence was insufficient to [warrant an instruction must be] viewed 'in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict.' " Armfield , 2003 S.D. 134 , ¶ 7, 672 N.W.2d at 481 (quoting Parker v. Casa Del Rey , 2002 S.D. 29 , ¶ 5, 641 N.W.2d 112 , 115 ). [¶22.] The doctrine of equitable estoppel is "[a] defensive doctrine preventing one party from taking unfair advantage of another when, through false language or conduct, the person to be estopped has induced another person to act in a certain way, with the result that the other person has been injured in some way." Estoppel 2018"A claim that the evidence was insufficient to [warrant an instruction must be] viewed 'in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict.' " Armfield , 2003 S.D. 134 , ¶ 7, 672 N.W.2d at 481 (quoting Parker v. Casa Del Rey , 2002 S.D. 29 , ¶ 5, 641 N.W.2d 112 , 115 ). [¶22.] The doctrine of equitable estoppel is "[a] defensive doctrine preventing one party from taking unfair advantage of another when, through false language or conduct, the person to be estopped has induced another person to act in a certain way, with the result that the other person has been injured in some way." Estoppel | 1 | 2 |
Triangle Underwriters, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc. And Honeywell Information Systems, Inc.green1 sentence2014“A manufacturer’s efforts at repair subsequent to delivery do not extend the contract statute of limitations.” Jandreau v. Sheesley Plumbing & Heating Co., Inc., 324 N.W.2d 266, 272 (S.D. 1982) (quoting Triangle Underwriters, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 604 F.2d 737, 745 (2nd Cir. 1979)). -11- | 1 | 1 |
Jandreau v. Sheesley Plumbing & Heating Co.green1 sentence2014“A manufacturer’s efforts at repair subsequent to delivery do not extend the contract statute of limitations.” Jandreau v. Sheesley Plumbing & Heating Co., Inc., 324 N.W.2d 266, 272 (S.D. 1982) (quoting Triangle Underwriters, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc., 604 F.2d 737, 745 (2nd Cir. 1979)). -11- | 1 | 1 |
Department of Human Services v. Bellgreen1 sentence2003Bennett stated that “[w]e will not allow such a carefully crafted policy [involving limitations on reducing child support arrearag-es] to be defeated by the invocation of equitable defenses in circumstances where [the obligee] has not affirmatively misled the [obligor] to believe [the obligor] would bear no responsibility.” Id. ¶ 21 (quoting Department of Human Servs. v. Bell, 711 A.2d 1292, 1295-96 (Me.1998)) (further citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Farmers Elevator Co. of Elk Point v. Lylegreen2 sentences1984“We are not persuaded that there is any good reason why the doctrine of equitable estoppel should not be applied in a proper case to prevent a party from asserting the statute of frauds .... ” Farmers Elevator Co. of Elk Point v. Lyle, 90 S.D. 86, 91 , 238 N.W.2d 290, 293 (1976). 1984“We are not persuaded that there is any good reason why the doctrine of equitable estoppel should not be applied in a proper case to prevent a party from asserting the statute of frauds .... ” Farmers Elevator Co. of Elk Point v. Lyle, 90 S.D. 86, 91 , 238 N.W.2d 290, 293 (1976). | 1 | 1 |
Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Matsongreen2 sentences1976See, e. g., Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Matson, 68 S.D. 538 , 5 N.W.2d 314 . 1976See, e. g., Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Matson, 68 S.D. 538 , 5 N.W.2d 314 . | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Niemi v. Fredlund Township
green
2 sentences2025In doing so, we noted -23- #30868 that an implied dedication “is premised on the doctrine of equitable estoppel.” Id. (quoting Niemi v. Fredlund Twp., 2015 S.D. 62, ¶ 32 , 867 N.W.2d 725, 733 ). 2025In doing so, we noted -23- #30868 that an implied dedication “is premised on the doctrine of equitable estoppel.” Id. (quoting Niemi v. Fredlund Twp., 2015 S.D. 62, ¶ 32 , 867 N.W.2d 725, 733 ). | 2 | 2021–2025 |
Johnson v. Armfield
green
2 sentences2018"A claim that the evidence was insufficient to [warrant an instruction must be] viewed 'in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict.' " Armfield , 2003 S.D. 134 , ¶ 7, 672 N.W.2d at 481 (quoting Parker v. Casa Del Rey , 2002 S.D. 29 , ¶ 5, 641 N.W.2d 112 , 115 ). [¶22.] The doctrine of equitable estoppel is "[a] defensive doctrine preventing one party from taking unfair advantage of another when, through false language or conduct, the person to be estopped has induced another person to act in a certain way, with the result that the other person has been injured in some way." Estoppel 2018“A claim that the evidence was insufficient to [warrant an instruction must be] viewed ‘in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict.’” Armfield, 2003 S.D. 134 , ¶ 7, 672 N.W.2d at 481 (quoting Parker v. Casa Del Rey, 2002 S.D. 29 , ¶ 5, 641 N.W.2d 112, 115 ). [¶22.] The doctrine of equitable estoppel is “[a] defensive doctrine preventing one party from taking unfair advantage of another when, through false language or conduct, the person to be estopped has induced another person to act in a certain way, with the result that the other person has been injured in some way.” Estoppel, Bla | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Parker v. Casa Del Rey-Rapid City, Inc.
green
2 sentences2018"A claim that the evidence was insufficient to [warrant an instruction must be] viewed 'in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict.' " Armfield , 2003 S.D. 134 , ¶ 7, 672 N.W.2d at 481 (quoting Parker v. Casa Del Rey , 2002 S.D. 29 , ¶ 5, 641 N.W.2d 112 , 115 ). [¶22.] The doctrine of equitable estoppel is "[a] defensive doctrine preventing one party from taking unfair advantage of another when, through false language or conduct, the person to be estopped has induced another person to act in a certain way, with the result that the other person has been injured in some way." Estoppel 2018“A claim that the evidence was insufficient to [warrant an instruction must be] viewed ‘in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict.’” Armfield, 2003 S.D. 134 , ¶ 7, 672 N.W.2d at 481 (quoting Parker v. Casa Del Rey, 2002 S.D. 29 , ¶ 5, 641 N.W.2d 112, 115 ). [¶22.] The doctrine of equitable estoppel is “[a] defensive doctrine preventing one party from taking unfair advantage of another when, through false language or conduct, the person to be estopped has induced another person to act in a certain way, with the result that the other person has been injured in some way.” Estoppel, Bla | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Peterson v. Hohm
green
2 sentences2004This Court disagreed, holding that the claimant had no justification for not making a timely claim; the facts did not support the finding of an estoppel. [¶ 23.] In Peterson, 2000 SD 27 , 607 N.W.2d 8 , we acknowledged the doctrine of equitable tolling, but held it did not apply under the facts of the case. 2004This Court disagreed, holding that the claimant had no justification for not making a timely claim; the facts did not support the finding of an estoppel. [¶ 23.] In Peterson, 2000 SD 27 , 607 N.W.2d 8 , we acknowledged the doctrine of equitable tolling, but held it did not apply under the facts of the case. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
State Ex Rel. Bennett v. Peterson
green
2 sentences2003However, in Bennett the obligor’s equitable estoppel and waiver arguments were “unpersuasive” and “not a viable defense.” Id. ¶ 20 & n.3. 2003Bennett stated that “[w]e will not allow such a carefully crafted policy [involving limitations on reducing child support arrearag-es] to be defeated by the invocation of equitable defenses in circumstances where [the obligee] has not affirmatively misled the [obligor] to believe [the obligor] would bear no responsibility.” Id. ¶ 21 (quoting Department of Human Servs. v. Bell, 711 A.2d 1292, 1295-96 (Me.1998)) (further citations omitted). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Somers v. Somers
green
2 sentences1986The cases can essentially be separated into three categories: (1) Those stemming from Somers v. Somers, 27 S.D. 500 , 131 N.W. 1091 (1911), which merely require that the party sought to be estopped must have “in some manner misled the party in whose favor the estoppel is sought.” Id., 131 N.W. at 1093 . 1986The cases can essentially be separated into three categories: (1) Those stemming from Somers v. Somers, 27 S.D. 500 , 131 N.W. 1091 (1911), which merely require that the party sought to be estopped must have “in some manner misled the party in whose favor the estoppel is sought.” Id., 131 N.W. at 1093 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
James Oxley v. Ralston Purina Company
green
1 sentence1976Oxley v. Ralston Purina Co., 6 Cir., 349 F.2d 328 ; 3 Williston on Contracts (3rd Ed. Jaeger) § 533A; J. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Poland v. O'Connor
neutral
1 sentence1968Woodworth v. Franklin, 85 Okl. 27 , 204 P. 452 , 27 A.L.R. 590 ; Poland v. O'Connor, 1 Neb. 50 , 93 Am.Dec. 327; Brey v. Tvedt, 74 N.D. 192 , 21 N.W.2d 49 ; Lowrey v. Lowrey, 117 Iowa 704 , 89 N.W. 1118 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Woodworth v. Franklin
green
2 sentences1968Woodworth v. Franklin, 85 Okl. 27 , 204 P. 452 , 27 A.L.R. 590 ; Poland v. O'Connor, 1 Neb. 50 , 93 Am.Dec. 327; Brey v. Tvedt, 74 N.D. 192 , 21 N.W.2d 49 ; Lowrey v. Lowrey, 117 Iowa 704 , 89 N.W. 1118 . 1968Woodworth v. Franklin, 85 Okl. 27 , 204 P. 452 , 27 A.L.R. 590 ; Poland v. O'Connor, 1 Neb. 50 , 93 Am.Dec. 327; Brey v. Tvedt, 74 N.D. 192 , 21 N.W.2d 49 ; Lowrey v. Lowrey, 117 Iowa 704 , 89 N.W. 1118 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Lowery v. Lowery
neutral
1 sentence1968Woodworth v. Franklin, 85 Okl. 27 , 204 P. 452 , 27 A.L.R. 590 ; Poland v. O'Connor, 1 Neb. 50 , 93 Am.Dec. 327; Brey v. Tvedt, 74 N.D. 192 , 21 N.W.2d 49 ; Lowrey v. Lowrey, 117 Iowa 704 , 89 N.W. 1118 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Brey v. Tvedt
green
2 sentences1968Woodworth v. Franklin, 85 Okl. 27 , 204 P. 452 , 27 A.L.R. 590 ; Poland v. O'Connor, 1 Neb. 50 , 93 Am.Dec. 327; Brey v. Tvedt, 74 N.D. 192 , 21 N.W.2d 49 ; Lowrey v. Lowrey, 117 Iowa 704 , 89 N.W. 1118 . 1968Woodworth v. Franklin, 85 Okl. 27 , 204 P. 452 , 27 A.L.R. 590 ; Poland v. O'Connor, 1 Neb. 50 , 93 Am.Dec. 327; Brey v. Tvedt, 74 N.D. 192 , 21 N.W.2d 49 ; Lowrey v. Lowrey, 117 Iowa 704 , 89 N.W. 1118 . | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Houck
green
1 sentence1942Federal Land Bank v. Houck, 68 S. D. 449, 4 N. W.2d 213 . | 1 | 1942–1942 |
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.