Opinion ID: 1879728
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: common law, statutory, and constitutional rights

Text: The attempt to legislate in this area fails for an even more basic reasonthe Constitution of the State of South Dakota and other South Dakota law in existence on July 1, 1985. South Dakota Constitution, art. VI § 20 provides: All courts shall be open, and every man for an injury done him in his property, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and right and justice, administered without denial or delay. SDCL 20-9-1 provides in part: Every person is responsible for injury to the person, property, or rights of another caused by his willful acts or caused by his want of ordinary care or skill[.] As indicated above, these constitutional and statutory provisions were in full force and effect on July 1, 1985. They continue in existence as of this date. In Bego v. Gordon, 407 N.W.2d 801, 806 (S.D.1987), after noting the state's immunity from suit without legislative consent, we stated: [T]he liability of a state employee for his own negligent or intentional acts is another matter. Every person is responsible for injury to the person, property, or rights of another caused by his willful acts or ... want of ordinary care[.] SDCL 20-9-1. The remedy provided by common law and by this statute is supported not only by the open courts provision but by other substantial constitutional provisions.[ [8] ] SDCL 20-9-1 is a simple codification of the common law of negligence. In essence, then, the South Dakota Constitution and existing statutory law provide that an injured person has a right to a remedy against a wrongdoer. Zacher v. Budd Co., 396 N.W.2d 122 (S.D.1986); Oien v. City of Sioux Falls, 393 N.W.2d 286 (S.D.1986); Daugaard v. Baltic Co-op Bldg. Supply Ass'n, 349 N.W.2d 419 (S.D.1984). This is so whether the wrongdoer acts alone or with another wrongdoer. Bego, supra . The legislature can impose reasonable restrictions upon available remedies and even upon these rights in accordance with the constitution, as long as they do not violate the constitution; but they cannot destroy these rights in violation of the constitution. We reverse and remand for trial. HENDERSON, J., concurs. WUEST, C.J., concurs in part. MORGAN and MILLER, JJ., dissent.