In Re the Conservatorship of Gaaskjolen, 2014 SD 10

Dora Gaaskjolen, age 87, has dementia and expressive aphasia, with multiple health issues and significant ranch land ownership; she has in-home care and a family dispute over management and finances.
Dora’s daughter Audrey nominated as conservator; Shane Penfield and others sought appointment of Dacotah Bank as temporary, then permanent conservator.
Temporary conservatorship was granted for 90 days starting Sept. 4, 2012, extended to 180 days; Dora moved to set aside the temporary order.
February 2013 hearing found Dora lacks capacity to manage affairs; Audrey’s bankruptcy, bond concerns, and potential conflicts weighed against her nomination.
Circuit court ultimately appointed Dacotah Bank as Dora’s permanent conservator based on bank’s qualifications and best interests, denying Audrey’s appointment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the permanent conservator appointment was proper.	Gaaskjolen argues Audrey should be conservator.	Shane argues Audrey not eligible; bank suitable.	Yes; bank proper, Audrey not eligible.
Whether the temporary conservatorship ruling was properly preserved given mootness.	Temporary order should be reviewed.	Moot since permanent conservator in place.	Moot; not addressed on appeal.

Blare, 589 N.W.2d 211 (S.D. 1999) (best interests standard governs appointment of guardian or conservator; discretion to appoint)
In re Guardianship of Nelson, 827 N.W.2d 72 (S.D. 2013) (abuse of discretion standard in conservatorship decisions)
In re Guardianship of S.M.N., 781 N.W.2d 213 (S.D. 2010) (factual findings reviewed for clear error; de novo for legal questions)
In re Guardianship and Conservatorship of A.L.T. & S.J.T., 712 N.W.2d 338 (S.D. 2006) (standards for evaluating guardian/conservator suitability)
In re Guardianship Jacobsen, 482 N.W.2d 634 (S.D. 1992) (discretion of appointing court in guardian selection)