State v. Ruth
Citations
- 9 S.D. 84
- 68 N.W. 189
- 1896 S.D. LEXIS 116
Syllabus
<p>1. An officer who, without legal excuse, fails to perform a ministerial duty, is liable for the proximate results of his failure to any person to whom he owes performance of such duty.</p> <p>2. The commissioner of school and public lands is not liable for delay in distributing the public school income fund to the various public schools entitled thereto, where it does not appear that the schools sustained any loss by the delay.</p> <p>3. The commissioner of school and public lands is liable for failure to make, at the time required by law, an estimate of the permanent school fund, and notify the county auditors thereof; thereby causing the funds to remain uninvested, and a consequent loss of interest. If the loss of interest was not caused by failure to make such estimate, the commissioner is liable for at least nominal damages.</p> <p>4. The commissioner of school and public lands is not liable for failing to distribute among' the counties entitled thereto, within the time required by law, certain funds, which were afterwards lost through the defalcation of the state treasurer.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “[I]n order.to warrant a finding that ... an act ... is the proximate cause of an injury, it must appear that the injury was the natural and probable consequence of the ... act, and that it ought to have been foreseen, in the light of the attending circumstances.”
- “[I]n order to warrant a finding that . . . an act . . . is the proximate cause of an injury, it must appear that the injury was the natural and probable consequence of the . . . act, and that it ought to have been foreseen, in the light of the attending circumstances.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Haney
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Bego v. GordonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1987-06-10· cited 162×
- Kyllo v. PanzerSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1995-08-16· cited 73×
- National Bank of South Dakota v. LeirSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1982-11-03· cited 60×
- Green v. Siegel, Barnett & SchutzSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1996-12-31· cited 50×
- Kruger v. WilsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1982-11-03· cited 39×
- Gasper v. FreidelSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1990-01-03· cited 38×
- Hansen v. South Dakota Department of TransportationSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1998-09-30· cited 35×
- Casazza v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 2000-08-30· cited 30×
- Ritter v. JohnsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1991-01-23· cited 25×
- Truman v. GrieseSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 2009-02-11· cited 17×
- Howley v. ScottSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1913-10-10· cited 16×
- Unruh v. Davison CountySouth Dakota Supreme Court· 2008-01-30· cited 13×
- Schelle v. FossSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1957-06-25· cited 13×
- Schaub Ex Rel. Schaub v. MoerkeSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1983-09-07· cited 12×
- Rising v. DickinsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1909-05-01· cited 12×
- Olson v. GuindonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 2009-07-22· cited 6×
- Hansen v. State Dept. of TransportationSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1998-09-30· cited 5×
- Long v. State of S.D.South Dakota Supreme Court· 2017-11-21· cited 4×
- Kanaly v. State ex rel. JanklowSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1987-02-25· cited 2×
- State v. RuthSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1900-12-05· cited 1×
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.