At Beardsley, Jensen & Von Wald, the experience of our attorneys translates to superior results for our clients.  Please review the following examples of our outcomes in personal injury and other litigation matters, and then  contact us  to find out how we can put our knowledge and experience to work for you

Personal Injury:

• The SD Supreme Court affirmed a trial court decision regarding underinsured motorist coverage.  The Supreme Court determined that $1,000,000 of coverage existed for the Plaintiff, who received a brain injury as a result of a motor vehicle accident.  The Court ruled that even though the Plaintiff was standing next to the employer's vehicle, conversing with his boss, that he was "occupying" the vehicle under the terms of the policy.  Roden vs. General Casualty Company and Wayne Anderson , #22236-9-DG, 2003 SD 130.

Burns and Electrocutions

• A jury awarded Steve Beardsley's clients $1.56 million dollars against Qwest Communications.  The Plaintiff received severe injuries as a result of an electrical injury which occurred when lightning struck near a pay telephone.  The Plaintiff was using the phone when an electrical surge traveled through the telephone line and electrocuted him.  It was discovered that Qwest Communications had failed to install the appropriate surge protector in the line.  As a result, the jury found the Company liable for all of the Plaintiff's damages.  It should be noted that the jury awarded the Plaintiff's wife with $375,000, for loss of consortium.
  
  
• Steve Beardsley negotiated a $500,000 settlement on behalf of his client who was severely burned in an apartment fire.
  
  
• The firm successfully secured a settlement of more than one million ($1,000,000) dollars in multi-party litigation involving injuries resulting from a fire.

Construction Injuries

• The firm’s largest settlement reached on behalf of a client involved a construction accident here in Rapid City.  The terms of the settlement prevent the firm from disclosing any additional information regarding this case.

Products Liability

• At Beardsley, Jensen & Von Wald, we have been fortunate to successfully represent many people injured as a result of a defective product.  We are presently fighting a Fortune 500 company regarding their defective blades used in LASIK eye surgery.  These defective blades caused permanent and devastating injury to our client.
  
  Prior settlements of products liability cases exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000).

• In November of 2007 a Hamlin County Jury awarded Gary Jensen's client $401,367.04 in actual damages and $1 million in punitive damages arising out of claim against Deere and Company; a failing bearing caused a fire and resulting total destruction of a self-propelled forage harvester.

Civil Rights

• A jury returned a verdict in favor Steve Beardsley's and Brad Lee's client, Mindy Kahle, for $1.1 million dollars against Jermaine Leonard. Mindy was a pretrial detainee at the Pennington County Jail when Leonard entered her cell at night and sexually assaulted and raped her three times. Leonard was training to be a correctional officer at the Pennington County Jail when the assaults occurred. The jury found that Leonard was guilty of violating Mindy's constitutional civil rights, civil battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The jury's award of $1.1 million dollars comprised $600,000 dollars in compensatory damages to compensate Ms. Kahle for her injuries and $500,000 dollars in punitive damages to punish Leonard for his actions.

• Steve Beardsley successfully negotiated a settlement for $1.7 million dollars in favor of his client, Stacy Webb, stemming from a civil rights lawsuit against the Douglas County Jail and other defendants in Douglas, Oregon. Stacy was a transient inmate who was housed in the Douglas County Jail and being transported to South Dakota for a charge related to insufficient funds checks. Stacy was 31 years old at the time of the incarceration. When Stacy was admitted to the jail she informed the jail that she had a headache for 4 days. The jail finally arranged for her to see the facility doctor a day and a half later. The doctor failed to properly care for her and as a result she suffered a brain aneurysm 1 ½ days later. As a result of the brain aneurysm Stacy is is severely limited, mentally and physically, and permanently resides in an institutional care facility.

• Serious cases of employees being abused have been prosecuted by this firm.  These include rape, physical abuse and emotional trauma at the work place.  Numerous confidential settlements have been attained on behalf of these seriously injured persons.

Worker’s Compensation

• The SD Supreme Court ruled in favor of our client when deciding whether the Social Security old age benefits offset applied to lump sum calculations.
  
  
• The Circuit Court upheld the Department of Labor’s finding requiring employer/insurer to compensate our client for his very severe work place injury which occurred in the employer’s parking lot.

Appellate Results:

• The South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of our client, Black Hills Power, Inc. ("BHP") against property owners Timothy and Leann Johns, who brought a claim of trespass or, in the alternative, inverse condemnation based upon placement of an anchor pole and guy wires on the Johns' property. The pole and wires were placed on the property in 1989. Johns purchased the property in 1990, so they knew of the existence of the pole and wires. The Court affirmed summary judgment on the basis that Johns' lack standing to bring the claim. The Court explained that Johns' action is one for inverse condemnation or taking because placement of the pole and guy wires was a permanent trespass. Because the trespass or taking was permanent, the cause of action belonged to the property owner at the time the pole and guy wires were installed - the former owned from whom Johns purchased the property. Therefore, the Court concluded, "We affirm the grant of summary judgment because Johns do not have standing." Johns vs Black Hills Power, Inc., 2006 SD 85 (S.D.  2006).
  
  
For more information, click here


• The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that our client, Mindy Kahle, presented sufficient facts for a jury to decide whether Deputy Tim Malone violated her constitutional rights while she was held as a pretrial detainee at the Pennington County Jail.  Kahle alleges that on three occasions she was sexually assaulted by Jermaine Leonard, a guard at the Pennington County Jail, while Malone was in charge of supervising Leonard.  The United States District Court, Karen E. Schreier, Chief Judge, held that Leonard and Malone were not entitled to immunity based upon the facts set forth by Kahle.  Malone appealed that decision and the Eighth Circuit affirmed, concluding:  “a reasonable juror who accepted Kahle’s version of the events could conclude that Malone violated Kahle’s clearly-established constitutional rights by demonstrating deliberate indifference to a substantial risk that she would be seriously harmed by Leonard.”  Kahle v. Leonard, --- F.3d ---, 2007 WL 438769 (8th Cir. 2007).

• The South Dakota Supreme Court determined that exercising personal jurisdiction over non-resident defendants in a case involving alleged violations of South Dakota anti-trust laws violated the defendants’ right to due process of law.  It reversed the Circuit Court decision to the contrary.  The Supreme Court determined that its three part test for acquiring personal jurisdiction had not been met.  The Court set out its test as follows: 

First, the defendant must purposefully avail himself of the privilege of acting in the forum state, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its law.  Second, the cause of action must arise from defendant’s activities directed at the forum state.  Finally, the acts of defendant must have a substantial connection with the forum state to make the exercise of jurisdiction over defendant a reasonable one.  Frankenfeld vs. Crompton Corporation, Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc., Uniroyal Chemical Company Limited 2005 SD 55, ¶ 17 .

For more information, click here


• Our client, Golden Reward Mining Company, L.P., successfully defeated a prescriptive easement claim with regard to one of its roads in the Black Hills of South Dakota.  The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed the finding of the trial court, holding that the adjacent landowners’ use of the roadways was permissive.  Rancour vs. Golden Reward Mining Co., 2005 SD 28.  The Court stated the following with regard to the use of roads over wild or unenclosed land, which is what Golden Reward’s land was: 

Generally, a prima facie showing of open and continuous use of the land owner’s property with the owner’s knowledge creates a presumption that the claimant’s use is adverse under a claim of right…  However, ‘when one claims an easement by prescription over wild or unenclosed lands of another, mere use of the way for the required time is not generally sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the use is adverse.’…The passage over unenclosed and unimproved land is deemed permissive.  The reason for the rule is that it ‘assumes’ the owner of such land in many instances will not be in a position to readily detect or prevent others from crossing over his land, and, even if he did, he might not enter any objection because of the desire to accommodate others and because such usage resulted in no immediate damage to him.’ Additionally, ‘in such instances the landowner would probably have no reason to think the users of the passage way were attempting to acquire any adverse right.’ 

For more information, click here

• The South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment in favor of the American Cancer Society a beneficiary of the decedent's will holding the contestant failed to meet its burden of proof in challenging the decedent's testamentary capacity and the validity of the decedent's bequeathing a significant portion of his estate to the American Cancer Society.
  
  
• The SD Supreme Court affirmed a trial court decision regarding underinsured motorist coverage.  The Supreme Court determined that $1,000,000 of coverage existed for the Plaintiff, who received a brain injury as a result of a motor vehicle accident.  The Court ruled that even though the Plaintiff was standing next to the employer's vehicle, conversing with his boss, that he was "occupying" the vehicle under the terms of the policy.  Roden vs. General Casualty Company and Wayne Anderson , #22236-9-DG, 2003 SD 130.
  
  
• The South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of a design professional, our client, and against local homeowners who had sued for alleged damage related to ground movement during construction of a shopping mall.  The ten year statute of repose barred the claim.  Cleveland vs. FMG, Inc., and others, 2003 S.D. 54.
  


• The South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of real estate owner, our client, and against holder of first right of refusal, holding that the first right of refusal had not been triggered by certain actions undertaken by owner.  Rothenberger vs. Wharf , # 22607, May 5, 2003. 

• The South Dakota Supreme Court reversed the trial court and determined an insurer, our client, was in fact entitled to subrogation on a property damage claim they had paid.  Met Life Auto and Home Ins. v. Lester, 2006 SD 62.

Please  contact us  to ask about other results we have been able to obtain for our clients, those who have brought a lawsuit against another party and those we have defended against lawsuits brought against them.

* Past success cannot be an assurance of future success because each case must be decided on its own merits.