Opinion ID: 1303664
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Did the trial court correctly place the burden of proof and persuasion on the Argus?

Text: Argus claims the trial court erred by placing the burden of proof and persuasion on them. We find this claim to be lacking merit. `Ordinarily the burden of proof follows the pleadings, that is, he who pleads and relies upon the affirmative of an issue must carry the burden of proving it. This proposition is well established.' Frank Stinson Chevrolet, Inc. v. Connelly, 356 N.W.2d 480, 482 (S.D.1984) (quoting Verschoor v. Miller, 259 Iowa 170, 143 N.W.2d 385, 388 (1966)). SDCL 26-7A-36 provides that juvenile proceedings are closed unless the court finds compelling reasons to require otherwise. Argus filed the motion to open these hearings; therefore, it bears the burden of proving to the court that compelling reasons require open proceedings. SDCL 26-7A-36.