807 N.W.2d 108
S.D.2011Background
- Iron Wing sued in Oct 2008 for sexual abuse by Sr. Poitra and Fr. Sutmueller at St. Paul’s Indian School decades earlier.
- Defendants include Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, Blue Cloud Abbey, Oblate Sisters, and others.
- South Dakota’s statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse requires action within three years of the act or three years of discovering the injury–whichever is later (SDCL 26-10-25).
- Circuit Court granted summary judgment, holding Iron Wing’s claims expired because he knew of anger/hatred toward the church more than three years before suit.
- Iron Wing argued that there was no evidence linking his anger to the abuse, and that an expert showed the anger obscured memories; he claimed inquiry notice had not been shown.
- The Supreme Court affirmed, holding Iron Wing was put on inquiry notice more than three years before filing, thus baring the action.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether anger/hatred is an injury under SDCL 26-10-25 | Iron Wing contends anger is not the injury caused by abuse. | Defendants argue any injury is the consequence of abuse that triggers discovery for limitations. | Anger/hatred treated as injury; court clarifies inquiry notice analysis controls. |
| Whether Iron Wing was on inquiry notice more than three years before filing | Expert says anger hid memories; discovery occurred in 2005–2009 timeline, not earlier. | Plaintiff had facts prompting inquiry more than three years prior. | Iron Wing was on inquiry notice prior to 2005, triggering limitations. |
| Whether there are genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment | Dispute about causal link between anger and abuse remains material. | Discovery of causal link is sufficient for accrual; expert opinion does not defeat notice. | No; material facts established that accrual occurred before filing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Zephier v. Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, 752 N.W.2d 665 (S.D. 2008) (discovery requires causal connection, not mere awareness of abuse)
- One Star v. Sisters of St. Francis, 752 N.W.2d 668 (S.D. 2008) (discovery of injury requires inquiry notice for accrual)
- Rodriguez v. Miles, 799 N.W.2d 722 (S.D. 2011) (inquiry notice assessed by objective standard)
- Conway v. Conway, 487 N.W.2d 21 (S.D. 1992) (summary judgment on statute requires facts remaining; accrual question law)
- Peterson v. Hohm, 607 N.W.2d 8 (S.D. 2000) (accrual and limitations considerations in SD cases)
- Wissink v. Van De Stroet, 598 N.W.2d 213 (S.D. 1999) ( accrual is determined with regard to notice and discovery)