South Dakota Supreme Court
M. Irene Oesterling, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Richard W. Oesterling, Defendant and Appellee
September 12, 1984354 N.W.2d 735
Summary
The court held that the trial court improperly raised and applied waiver, estoppel, and laches as affirmative defenses for a pro se husband who had not pleaded them. Because the wife lacked notice and a fair opportunity to litigate those defenses, they were waived and could not be used to reduce the accrued alimony award. The judgment was reversed and remanded for proceedings on the issues actually pleaded.
Holding
- Whether the trial court could apply unpleaded affirmative defenses on behalf of the pro se husband. The trial court could not gratuitously raise and apply waiver, estoppel, or laches for the husband. Because the husband did not plead those defenses and the issues were not tried by express or implied consent, the defenses were waived.
Docket 14200
Cited by
- High Plains Genetics Research, Inc., Plaintiff and Appellant v. J K Mill-Iron Ranch, a Colorado Business, and John…
- Charles M. Huth, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Lea Ann Hoffman, F/k/a Lea Ann Huth, Defendant and Appellee
- Charlotte Kier, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Gordon Allen Kier, Defendant and Appellant
- Larry Wasland, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Porter Auto & Marine, Inc., Porter Auto & Marine, Inc. D/b/a Porter Auto…
- George Ferebee, Petitioner and Appellant v. Steven Hobart, Respondent and Appellee; George Ferebee, Petitioner And…
- All Star Construction Company, Inc., a South Dakota Corporation, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Mark Koehn and Alicia…
- St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Carol A. Kaarup and Darrell R. Kaarup, Et…
- Donald R. Baltzer, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Joan C. Baltzer, Defendant and Appellee