Stensland v. Harding CountyAnnotate this Case
Plaintiff sued Harding County for negligence after he drove into a washed-out portion of a county road and was injured. A jury returned a general verdict for the County. Plaintiff appealed, arguing that the County’s admitted violation of S.D. Codified Laws 31-28-6 entitled him to judgment as a matter of law as to the County’s liability and that the court erred by allowing questions regarding assumption of the risk and contributory negligence to go to the jury. The Supreme Court affirmed the jury’s verdict, holding that the trial court (1) did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion for judgment as a matter of law, as there was evidence that supported the verdict; and (2) the evidence supported the instructions given for contributory negligence and assumption of the risk.