Behrns, Appellant v. Burke, Respondent

Summary

The court affirmed judgment for the defendant, holding that South Dakota's guest statute, which limits an uncompensated automobile guest's recovery to injuries caused by willful and wanton misconduct, does not violate the state or federal constitutional provisions asserted. The court concluded that the statutory classification bears a rational relationship to legitimate legislative purposes, including protecting hospitality and encouraging free transportation, even though the court rejected prevention of collusion as a sufficient rationale. Justice Dunn, dissenting, would have held the statute unconstitutional because its classifications no longer had a reasonable relation to those purposes; Justice Coler, joined by Justices Winans and Wollman, concurred in the result but criticized the majority's discussion of juries and legislative policy.