South Dakota Supreme Court

Scott Moss, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Steve Guttormson, Arnold Guttormson, and Arnie’s Meats and Seafood, Austin…

June 26, 19961996 S.D. LEXIS 81

Summary

The South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the denial of summary judgment on Moss’s deceit and deceptive-trade-practices claims. It concluded that the employment relationship and evidence of Arnie’s ongoing mislabeling practices created a triable deceit claim, and that the statutory right of action was not limited to consumers or dependent on a prior declaration of a violation.

Holding

  • Whether Moss’s deceit claim could survive summary judgment.. Yes. The employment relationship imposed a duty to disclose facts Arnie’s was bound to disclose, and the admitted facts established that Arnie’s was engaged in deceitful practices when Moss was hired, creating a triable deceit claim.
  • Whether Moss could bring a statutory deceptive-trade-practices claim and whether a violation had to be declared before suit.. Yes. An employee is a “person” who may sue if adversely affected by an unlawful practice, and the statute does not require a violation to have been declared before the lawsuit begins.

Docket 19188, 19197

Cited authorities

  • Idaho Code § 48-602

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF
Scott Moss, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Steve Guttormson, Arnold Guttormson, and Arnie’s Meats and Seafood, Austin… (South Dakota 1996) | LawDiver