South Dakota Codified Laws

S.D. Codified Laws § 21-18-1 (2026)

Actions or small claims proceedings in which garnishment available--Persons and agencies subject to garnishment.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section SD-LEGsdlegislature.gov JustiaS.D. Codified Laws CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

21-18-1. Actions or small claims proceedings in which garnishment available--Persons and agencies subject to garnishment.

In any action or small claims proceeding to recover damages founded upon contract, express or implied, or pursuant to judgment or decree, any creditor is entitled to proceed by garnishment in any court having jurisdiction of the subject of the action, against any person, as defined in § 15-7-1, including the state and any municipal or public corporation, and including any corporation organized or authorized to be organized by or under the laws of any state or of the United States, which has the power to sue or be sued who shall be indebted to or have any property, real or personal, in its possession or under its control belonging to such creditor's debtor, in the cases, upon the conditions, and in the manner prescribed in this chapter.

Source: SDC 1939, § 37.2801; SL 1939, ch 143; SL 1990, ch 157, § 1; SL 2001, ch 107, § 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: Buller v. Buechler, 706 F.2d 844 (8th Cir. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Buller v. Buechler, 706 F.2d 844 (8th Cir. 1983). · cites it 5× “The plaintiffs concede that the three garnishment actions substantially complied with the requirements of South Dakota’s garnishment statute, S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §§ 21-18-1 et seq.”

Stuckers v. Thomas, 374 F. Supp. 178 (D.S.D. 1974). “§ 21-18-1. Once a summons in the contract action has been issued, the plaintiff garnishor may make an affidavit stating that he believes a third party garnishee possesses property of the defendant’s.”

Est. of Jeremy Isadore Levin, Est. of Lucille Hare Levin, & Suzelle M. Smith, Ex'x of the Est. of Lucille Hare Levin & Successor in Interest to Jeremy Levin & Dr. Lucille Levin v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (D.S.D. 2026). · cites it 4× “On February 12, 2021, the Levins filed a complaint seeking turnover of Nautic blocked funds3 under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) and SDCL § 21-18-1. Docket 1 ¶¶ 16-24. On April 4, 2025, Wells Fargo produced a spreadsheet of blocked accounts, which disclosed the…”

Sollid v. Pennington Cnty. Hous. Auth., 309 N.W.2d 814 (S.D. 1981). · cites it 2× “* SDCL 21-18-1. See Fargo v. Schraudenbach, 40 S.”

Sigler v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 298 N.W.2d 792 (S.D. 1980). “SDCL 21-18-1 states: In any action to recover damages founded upon contract, express or implied, or upon judgment or decree, or at any time after the issuing in any case of an execution against property and before the time when it is returnable, any creditor shall be entitled to…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.