Preview:

LEONARD McELHANEY
Plaintiffs and Appellants
v.
CITY OF EDGEMONT

Defendant and Appellee

[2002 SD 159]
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of
The Seventh Judicial Circuit
Fall River County, South Dakota

Hon. Jeff Davis, Judge

PATRICK M. GINSBACH of
Farrell, Farrell and Ginsbach
Hot Springs, South Dakota
Attorneys for appellant.

DONALD P. KNUDSEN of
Gunderson, Palmer, Goodsell
& Nelson
Rapid City, South Dakota
Attorneys for appellee.

Considered on Briefs October 7, 2002
Opinion Filed 12/18/2002

#22292
GILBERTSON, Chief Justice
[¶1.] In McElhaney v. Anderson (McElhaney I), we reversed and remanded the circuit court’s decision which restored Leonard McElhaney (McElhaney), former Street and Water/UtilitiesSuperintendent for the City of Edgemont (City), to his appointed position. 1999 SD 78, ¶16, 598 NW2d 203, 207. In our holding, we found that McElhaney had adequate alternative remedies through the South Dakota Department of Labor (DOL). Id. However, in the DOL proceedings, McElhaney’s claims were ultimately dismissed, which the Seventh Judicial Circuit later affirmed. As a result, McElhaney brings this appeal. He claims that summary judgment was not proper because the City violated its procedure manual when the Mayor did not reappoint him to his position. We affirm the circuit court’s order.
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
[¶2.] McElhaney served as the City’s Street and Water Commissioner/ Utility Superintendent beginning in 1977. However, on May 4, 1998, the then Mayor, Gary Martin (Martin) appointed and the Edgemont City Council (Council) approved, Russell Anderson (Anderson) as the new Street and Water Commissioner.[1] McElhaney filed an application and affidavit for writ of prohibition in the circuit court several days later. He asserted that the Council had no authority to appoint a Street and Water Commissioner because it had not included that appointment as an agenda item prior to the meeting. The circuit court granted McElhaney’s writ and scheduled a hearing for May 29, 1998.
[¶3.] After the hearing, the court found that by adding the appointment of a Street and Water Commissioner to the agenda during the Council meeting, the City had violated South Dakota’s open meetings law. Therefore, the City’s appointment of Anderson to that position was void. The writ of prohibition was discharged, and the City was instructed to “follow the applicable statutes.

Download 898895.pdf

South Dakota Law