Court Opinion

ID: 9727757
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 13:49:43.145407+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:25:42.515821
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(concurring in result).
I concur in the result only. I would affirm the trial court’s result and its reasons. Seymour’s duties and functions were clearly those of a public officer even under the authority cited and relied upon by the majority. Griggs v. Harding County, 68 S.D. 429, 3 N.W.2d 485 (1942).
Seymour was a “public officer” with respect to his duties and functions as farm manager, even if he was only paid $200 over regular teacher pay. He “voluntarily” became “interested individually” in the school’s “contract” and violated SDCL 3-16-7. He also violated SDCL 6-1-1. As such, he was properly discharged for the right reasons.