If applicable, the plaintiff's damages will be "reduced in proportion to the amount of the plaintiff's contributory negligence." Id.Estate of He Crow by He Crow v. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 188 (S.D. 1992) (citing Crab v. Wade, 167 N.W.2d 546, 549 (S.D. 1969); Estate of Largent v. United States, 910 F.2d 497, 499 (8th Cir. 1990)).
"The term slight in SDCL § 20-9-2 has been defined to mean small in quantum in comparison with the negligence of the [other party]." Estate of He Crow v. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 188 (S.D. 1992) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). "It is a question of fact which varies with the facts and circumstances of each case whether [plaintiff's] negligence is slight compared to that of [defendant's employees]."
"Slight" in regard to negligence has been defined by the South Dakota Supreme Court as "small in quantum in comparison with the negligence of the defendant." Estate of He Crow by He Crowv. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 188 (S.D. 1992) (quoting Crabb v. Wade, 167 N.W.2d 546, 549 (S.D. 1969)). As defendant argued in its brief, courts in South Dakota have barred a plaintiff's negligence claim based on the court's finding that plaintiff's contributory negligence was more than slight as a matter of law.
[¶ 12.] Whether the circuit court was clearly erroneous in its damages award. [¶ 13.] “[T]he amount of damages to be awarded is a factual issue to be determined by the trier of fact.” Roth v. Farner–Bocken Co., 2003 S.D. 80, ¶ 26, 667 N.W.2d 651, 662 (quoting Estate of Pamela He Crow v. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 192 (S.D.1992)); see also Lord v. Hy–Vee Food Stores, 2006 S.D. 70, ¶ 31, 720 N.W.2d 443, 454 (stating an award of damages is a factual issue). “Damages must be reasonable and must be proved with reasonable certainty.”
[¶13.] "[T]he amount of damages to be awarded is a factual issue to be determined by the trier of fact." Roth v. Farner-Bocken Co., 2003 S.D. 80, ¶ 26, 667 N.W.2d 651, 662 (quoting Estate of Pamela He Crow, 494 N.W.2d 186, 192 (S.D. 1992)); see also Lord v. Hy-Vee Food Stores, 2006 S.D. 70, ¶ 31, 720 N.W.2d 443, 454 (stating an award of damages is a factual issue). "Damages must be reasonable and must be proved with reasonable certainty."
[¶ 26.] Generally, "[t]he amount of damages to be awarded is a factual issue to be determined by the trier of fact." Estate of Pamela He Crow, 494 N.W.2d 186, 192 (S.D. 1992). However, "[a]n award of compensatory damages must not be the product of passion and prejudice and must be supported by the evidence."
"It is a question of fact which varies with the facts and circumstances of each case whether a plaintiff's negligence is slight compared to that of the defendant." Estate of He Crow v. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 188 (S.D. 1992) (citations omitted). In fact, Kern had a statutory duty to yield to vehicles on the street before backing out of his driveway.
Even if the court were to find Mr. Pickett was negligent, his negligence must still be compared to Mrs. Katon's conduct to evaluate contributory negligence. "The term slight in SDCL § 20-9-2 has been defined to mean small in quantum in comparison with the negligence of the [other party]." Estate of He Crow v. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 188 (S.D. 1992) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). "It is a question of fact which varies with the facts and circumstances of each case whether [Mrs. Katon's] negligence is slight compared to that of [Mr. Pickett]."
"The term slight in SDCL § 20-9-2 has been defined to mean small in quantum in comparison with the negligence of the [other party]." Estate of He Crow v. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 188 (S.D. 1992) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). "It is a question of fact which varies with the facts and circumstances of each case whether [Osborn's] negligence is slight compared to that of [Vore]."
Id. “The term slight in SDCL § 20–9–2 has been defined to mean small in quantum in comparison with the negligence of the defendant.” Estate of He Crow v. Jensen, 494 N.W.2d 186, 188 (S.D.1992) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). “It is a question of fact which varies with the facts and circumstances of each case whether a plaintiff's negligence is slight compared to that of the defendant.”