Studt v. Black Hills Federal Credit Union, 864 N.W.2d 513

McLean invested in a 2013 maturity CD with BHFCU; beneficiary designated to Sholes in 2011.
Studt, McLean’s son, was named attorney-in-fact under a 2012 general durable power of attorney.
Power of attorney allowed gifts to any person or organization as long as McLean’s needs were met and gifts were prudent for estate/tax planning.
Studt directed BHFCU in 2012 to close McLean’s accounts and transfer assets to Minnesota; the CD remained due to a favorable rate and penalty risks.
Upon McLean’s terminal illness and death in 2013, Sholes remained the CD beneficiary; Studt sought to change beneficiary to himself.
Circuit court held the power of attorney did not clearly authorize self-dealing; summary judgment for BHFCU/Sholes affirmed on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the power of attorney authorize self-dealing?	Studt argues broad language allows self-dealing.	BHFCU/Sholes contend no explicit authorizing language for self-dealing.	No self-dealing authority; language not explicit.
May extrinsic evidence prove principal’s intent to permit self-dealing?	Pederson affidavit should show intent to allow self-dealing.	Extrinsic evidence inadmissible to raise factual issues; strict construction controls.	Extrinsic evidence inadmissible; strict construction applies.

Bienash v. Moller, 2006 S.D. 78, 721 N.W.2d 431 (S.D. 2006) (power of attorney must contain clear, unmistakable authorization for self-dealing)
In re Guardianship of Blare, 1999 S.D. 3, 589 N.W.2d 211 (S.D. 1999) (strict construction; only specified powers granted)
Estate of Stevenson, 2000 S.D. 24, 605 N.W.2d 818 (S.D. 2000) (fiduciary must act with utmost good faith; avoid self-dealing)
Praefke v. Am. Enterprise Life Ins. Co., 655 N.W.2d 456 (Wis. Ct. App. 2002) (discusses self-dealing with broad powers; extrinsic evidence considerations)
Crosby v. Luehrs, 669 N.W.2d 635 (Neb. 2003) (extrinsic evidence in principal’s intent cases)