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.
7 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Shykes v. Rapid City Hilton Inngreen2 sentences2009The “good cause” determination “shall be liberally construed in favor of the employee.” SDCL 62-7-10. “ ‘The purpose of the written notice requirement is to give the employer the opportunity to investigate the injury while the facts are accessible.’ ” Shykes v. Rapid City Hilton Inn, 2000 SD 123, ¶ 24 , 616 N.W.2d 493, 499 (quoting Westergren v. Baptist Hosp. of Winner, 1996 SD 69, ¶ 18 , 549 N.W.2d 390, 395 ). 2009The “good cause” determination “shall be liberally construed in favor of the employee.” SDCL 62-7-10. “ ‘The purpose of the written notice requirement is to give the employer the opportunity to investigate the injury while the facts are accessible.’ ” Shykes v. Rapid City Hilton Inn, 2000 SD 123, ¶ 24 , 616 N.W.2d 493, 499 (quoting Westergren v. Baptist Hosp. of Winner, 1996 SD 69, ¶ 18 , 549 N.W.2d 390, 395 ). | 2 | 3 |
Streyle v. Steiner Corp.green2 sentences2006"The notice requirement protects the employer by assuring he is alerted to the possibility of a claim so that a prompt investigation can be performed." Id. [¶ 53.] "In determining actual knowledge, the employee must prove that *598 the employer had `sufficient knowledge to indicate the possibility of a compensable injury.'" Shykes v. Rapid City Hilton Inn, 2000 SD 123, ¶ 36 , 616 N.W.2d 493, 501 (quoting Streyle v. Steiner Corp., 345 N.W.2d 865, 866 (S.D.1984)). 2006“The notice requirement protects the employer by assuring he is alerted to the possibility of a claim so that a prompt investigation can be performed.” Id. [¶ 53.] “In determining actual knowledge, the employee must prove that the employer had ‘sufficient knowledge to indicate the possibility of a compensable injury.’ ” Shykes v. Rapid City Hilton Inn, 2000 SD 123, ¶ 36 , 616 N.W.2d 493, 501 (quoting Streyle v. Steiner Corp., 345 N.W.2d 865, 866 (S.D.1984)). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Westergren v. Baptist Hospital of Winner
green
2 sentences2009The “good cause” determination “shall be liberally construed in favor of the employee.” SDCL 62-7-10. “ ‘The purpose of the written notice requirement is to give the employer the opportunity to investigate the injury while the facts are accessible.’ ” Shykes v. Rapid City Hilton Inn, 2000 SD 123, ¶ 24 , 616 N.W.2d 493, 499 (quoting Westergren v. Baptist Hosp. of Winner, 1996 SD 69, ¶ 18 , 549 N.W.2d 390, 395 ). 2009The “good cause” determination “shall be liberally construed in favor of the employee.” SDCL 62-7-10. “ ‘The purpose of the written notice requirement is to give the employer the opportunity to investigate the injury while the facts are accessible.’ ” Shykes v. Rapid City Hilton Inn, 2000 SD 123, ¶ 24 , 616 N.W.2d 493, 499 (quoting Westergren v. Baptist Hosp. of Winner, 1996 SD 69, ¶ 18 , 549 N.W.2d 390, 395 ). | 3 | 2000–2009 |
Schindler v. Manchester Biscuit Co.
green
2 sentences1996Schuck, 529 N.W.2d at 897 (citing Schindler v. Manchester Biscuit Co., 71 S.D. 336 , 24 N.W.2d 76 (1946)). 1996Schuck, 529 N.W.2d at 897 (citing Schindler v. Manchester Biscuit Co., 71 S.D. 336 , 24 N.W.2d 76 (1946)). | 2 | 1995–1996 |
Brennan v. Brennan
green
2 sentences2018Moreover, the County objected, requested a hearing before the circuit court on the application for taxation of attorney fees and costs, and filed a written notice of a hearing on American Legion's request for attorney fees. 2 Both parties appeared at the attorney fee hearing held approximately three weeks later. [¶38.] We have conditioned an award of attorney fees upon compliance with "procedural due process and fundamental fairness." Kappenman v. Kappenman , 522 N.W.2d 199 , 203 (S.D. 1994) (quoting Brennan v. Brennan, 88 S.D. 541 , 543, 224 N.W.2d 192 , 193 (1974) ). 2018Moreover, the County objected, requested a hearing before the circuit court on the application for taxation of attorney fees and costs, and filed a written notice of a hearing on American Legion's request for attorney fees. 2 Both parties appeared at the attorney fee hearing held approximately three weeks later. [¶38.] We have conditioned an award of attorney fees upon compliance with "procedural due process and fundamental fairness." Kappenman v. Kappenman , 522 N.W.2d 199 , 203 (S.D. 1994) (quoting Brennan v. Brennan, 88 S.D. 541 , 543, 224 N.W.2d 192 , 193 (1974) ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Kappenman v. Kappenman
green
1 sentence2018Moreover, the County objected, requested a hearing before the circuit court on the application for taxation of attorney fees and costs, and filed a written notice of a hearing on American Legion's request for attorney fees. 2 Both parties appeared at the attorney fee hearing held approximately three weeks later. [¶38.] We have conditioned an award of attorney fees upon compliance with "procedural due process and fundamental fairness." Kappenman v. Kappenman , 522 N.W.2d 199 , 203 (S.D. 1994) (quoting Brennan v. Brennan, 88 S.D. 541 , 543, 224 N.W.2d 192 , 193 (1974) ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Schuck v. John Morrell & Co.
green
1 sentence1996Schuck, 529 N.W.2d at 897 (citing Schindler v. Manchester Biscuit Co., 71 S.D. 336 , 24 N.W.2d 76 (1946)). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
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.