7 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1987–1998 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 |
|---|---|---|
Permann v. South Dakota Department of Labor, Unemployment Insurance Divisiongreen2 sentences1993In Permann , we stated that "`mixed questions of law and fact [are] questions in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard, or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated.'" Id. (quoting Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 , 289 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 1781 , 1790 n. 19, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 , 80 n. 19 (1982)). 1993In Permann , we stated that “ ‘mixed questions of law and fact [are] questions in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard, or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated.’” Id. (quoting Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 , 289 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 1781 , 1790 n. 19, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 , 80 n. 19 (1982)). | 3 | 6 |
United States v. Winston Bryant McConneygreen1 sentence1998Permann, 411 N.W.2d at 118 (quoting Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 , 289 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 1781 , 1790 n. 19, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 , 80 n. 19 (1982)). [¶26.] If the question requires the court to “consider legal concepts in the mix of fact and law and to exercise judgment about the values that animate legal principles, then the concerns of judicial administration will favor the appellate court, and the question should be classified as one of law and reviewed de novo.” Id. at 119 (quoting United States v. McConney, 728 F.2d 1195, 1202 (9thCir.l984)). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Pullman-Standard v. Swint
green
2 sentences1993In Permann , we stated that “ ‘mixed questions of law and fact [are] questions in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard, or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated.’” Id. (quoting Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 , 289 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 1781 , 1790 n. 19, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 , 80 n. 19 (1982)). 1993In Permann , we stated that “ ‘mixed questions of law and fact [are] questions in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard, or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated.’” Id. (quoting Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 , 289 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 1781 , 1790 n. 19, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 , 80 n. 19 (1982)). | 6 | 1987–1998 |
Hartpence v. Youth Forestry Camp
green
2 sentences1987As the United States Supreme Court stated in Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 , 289 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 1781 , 1790 n. 19, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 , 80 n. 19 (1982), “mixed questions of law and fact [are] questions in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard, or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated.” Cf. Hartpence, 325 N.W.2d at 296 . 1987As the United States Supreme Court stated in Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 , 289 n. 19, 102 S.Ct. 1781 , 1790 n. 19, 72 L.Ed.2d 66 , 80 n. 19 (1982), "mixed questions of law and fact [are] questions in which the historical facts are admitted or established, the rule of law is undisputed, and the issue is whether the facts satisfy the statutory standard, or to put it another way, whether the rule of law as applied to the established facts is or is not violated." Cf. Hartpence, 325 N.W.2d at 296 . | 1 | 1987–1987 |
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.