Court Opinion

ID: 9583566
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:39:54.007332+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:38:57.161087
License: Public Domain

ERICKSTAD, Chief Justice,
specially concurring.
I respectfully specially concur. Because of what is said in the last sentence of the next to the last paragraph of the opinion, I am compelled to comment lest it be misinterpreted to mean that the discharge was not justified.
If the mission of Dakota Boys Ranch Association is to be achieved, it cannot be denied that very high standards must be maintained at all times and under frustrating circumstances by its employees who work with troubled youth. It follows that, although the discharge may have been necessary to maintain the mission of Boys Ranch, it was not sufficiently egregious to deprive the frustrated counselor of his job benefits, especially as it was not a part of a series of acts, but was only a onetime occurrence.