Preview:

Unified Judicial System

Carol A. Pitts Petitioner v. Vernon L. Larson in His Capacity as Auditor of the State of South Dakota Respondent [2001 SD 151] Original Proceedings Richard J. Helsper of Glover, Helsper & Rasmussen Brookings, South Dakota Attorneys for petitioner. Mark Barnett Attorney General Lawrence E. Long Chief Deputy Attorney General Jeffery P. Hallem Assistant Attorney General Pierre, South Dakota Attorneys for respondent. James F. Shelkleton South Dakota Board of Regents Pierre, South Dakota Attorney for Amicus Curiae. Argued October 1, 2001 Opinion Filed 12/26/2001 #22005 SABERS, Justice [¶1.] Carol Pitts, an employee of the South Dakota State University Cooperative Extension Service (SDSU CES) and a member of the South Dakota House of Representatives seeks a Writ of Mandamus compelling Vernon Larson, the State Auditor of South Dakota (Larson or State), to pay her for services rendered during her employment at SDSU. We decline to issue a Writ of Mandamus. FACTS [¶2.] On November 7, 2000, Carol Pitts was elected to the South Dakota House of Representatives from District 7, Brookings County. Pitts took the oath of office on January 9, 2001, and served as a representative during the Seventy-Sixth Legislative Assembly of the South Dakota Legislature. [¶3.] During this Legislative session, the 2001 General Appropriation Act was passed by both houses of the Legislature, was signed by the Governor and became law effective July 1, 2001. Some of the appropriations included in the General Appropriation Act were for personal services and operating expenses of SDSU CES. [¶4.] Pitts is currently employed by SDSU CES as a Nutrition, Health and Food Safety Specialist. She has been employed by SDSU CES since March 1990 and is subject

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/Opinions/744741.htm[5/8/2013 8:13:59 PM]

Unified Judicial System

to one-year appointment contracts. The most recent one-year appointment contract began July 1, 2001, and runs through June 30, 2002. [¶5.] On February 9, 2001, the Attorney General of South Dakota learned from the media that Pitts was a state employee. The Attorney General advised Pitts that her employment with SDSU CES and her position as a member of the House of Representatives presented a conflict of interest. Pitts, her attorney and the Attorney General

Download 744741.pdf

South Dakota Law