Hauswirth v. Hartigan

296 N.W.2d 535, 1980 S.D. LEXIS 392
South Dakota Supreme Court·Decided September 17, 1980·No. 12847·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

*536 PER CURIAM.

This is an attempted appeal from a judgment entered in a breach of contract action initiated by appellee in small claims court for failure of appellant to pay him $800 as promised for substantially completing the painting, staining and varnishing of a house. Appellant removed the action to circuit court for jury trial pursuant to SDCL 15-39-17.

Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court must appear plainly and affirmatively from the record presented, and absent such a showing, this Court is required to determine its jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal. Estate of Putnam, 254 N.W.2d 460 (S.D.1977). Under SDCL 15-39-23, this Court is without jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a trial by jury pursuant to transfer of a small claims action to circuit court. * Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

*

SDCL 15-39-23 provides:

The judgment entered pursuant to transfer for trial by jury either in the circuit court or in the formal side of the court where begun shall be final and no appeal may be taken therefrom.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hauswirth v. Hartigan, 296 N.W.2d 535, 1980 S.D. LEXIS 392 (S.D. 1980).

296 N.W.2d 535 (Hauswirth v. Hartigan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Krell v. Kappenman
297 N.W.2d 807 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1980)
Magnum Construction v. Sioux Falls Nautilus, Inc.
296 N.W.2d 536 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1980)