Court Opinion

ID: 9514869
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:52:14.919314+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:21.993832
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(dissenting).
[¶ 13.] I agree with the majority opinion that it would have been advisable for the circuit court to award temporary alimony which would allow it to enforce its order while an appeal was pending after an approved bond. Ryken v. Ryken, 440 N.W.2d 307, 308 (S.D.1989). That is one option under Ryken v. Ryken. Nevertheless, here, the circuit court retained the power to enforce its alimony order by contempt.
[¶ 14.] In Ryken, the circuit court attempted to enforce the alimony award through its contempt power while the appeal was pending. I concurred with the majority in Ryken, which held the circuit court was without jurisdiction to make such an order of contempt. In that case, the circuit court had approved the superse-deas bond and therefore it was without jurisdiction to enforce its order. That decision was dictated by SDCL 15-26A-25 which provides:
An appeal from a judgment or order shall not stay enforcement proceedings in the circuit court ... unless the appellant executes a supersedeas bond in the amount and form approved by the circuit court.
(Emphasis added). SDCL 15-26A-25 and SDCL 15-26A-32 create a necessary condition precedent, approval of the superse-deas bond. With such approval, the circuit court’s enforcement power is stayed. Likewise, a decision not to approve the supersedeas bond retains power in a circuit court to enforce its order. SDCL 15-26A-25, 32. Here, the circuit court did not approve the bond to stay payment of alimony:
The court will enter it’s order approving the supersedeas bond. The court will also enter it’s order staying the judgment, the judgments plural, that the plaintiff has against the defendant in the sums of $8,000, $20,000, and $7,000, which I believe total $35,000. The court will not stay payment of alimony or the requirement that the parties exchange property in accordance with the court’s equitable division of property.
(Emphasis added). The circuit court did not relinquish its power to enforce its order concerning alimony. As such, the order of contempt was proper and the circuit court should be affirmed.
[¶ 15.] Therefore, I dissent.