South Dakota Circuit Court Motion for Extension of Time

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA — CIRCUIT COURT

1. CAPTION

STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA                     )
                                           )  IN CIRCUIT COURT
COUNTY OF [________________________________])  [____] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
                                           )
                                           )  Civ. No. [________________]
[________________________________],        )
     Plaintiff(s),                         )
                                           )
vs.                                        )
                                           )
[________________________________],        )
     Defendant(s).                         )

2. TITLE OF MOTION

[PLAINTIFF'S/DEFENDANT'S] MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO [________________________________]

3. INTRODUCTION

NOW COMES [________________________________] (hereinafter "Movant"), by and through [his/her/their] attorneys, [________________________________], and pursuant to SDCL § 15-6-6(b), respectfully moves this Court for an Order extending the time within which to [________________________________]. In support of this Motion, Movant states as follows:

4. CASE INFORMATION

5. IDENTIFICATION OF DEADLINE

1. On [__/__/____], [☐ this Court entered a Scheduling Order / ☐ this Court entered an Order / ☐ the following event occurred: ________________________________] establishing a deadline of [__/__/____] for [________________________________].

2. The deadline arises under [☐ SDCL § [________________________________] / ☐ Court Order dated [__/__/____] / ☐ the Court's Scheduling Order dated [__/__/____] / ☐ other: ________________________________].

3. The current deadline [☐ has not yet expired / ☐ expired on [__/__/____]].

6. LEGAL STANDARD — SDCL § 15-6-6(b)

Under SDCL § 15-6-6(b), when an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified time by statute, rule, notice, or court order, the Court for cause shown may at any time in its discretion:

(1) Before Expiration of the Deadline: With or without motion or notice, order the period enlarged if the request is made before the expiration of the period originally prescribed or as extended by a previous order; or

(2) After Expiration of the Deadline: Upon motion made after the expiration of the specified period, permit the act to be done where the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect.

Limitations: The Court may not extend the time for taking any action under SDCL §§ 15-6-50(b), 15-6-59(b) and (d), and 15-6-60(b), except to the extent and under the conditions stated therein.

The South Dakota Supreme Court has held that the grant or denial of an enlargement of time is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard. Colton Lumber Co. v. Siemonsma, 2002 SD 116, 652 N.W.2d 731. The Court has further stated that "[t]he trial court's discretion is to be exercised liberally in accord with legal and equitable principles in order to promote the ends of justice." Id. The term "excusable neglect" is to be interpreted liberally to ensure that cases are heard and tried on the merits. Clarke v. Clarke, 423 N.W.2d 818 (S.D. 1988). Excusable neglect must be "neglect of a nature that would cause a reasonable, prudent person to act similarly under similar circumstances." Tingle v. Parkston Grain Co., 444 N.W.2d 381 (S.D. 1989).

7. GROUNDS FOR EXTENSION

Movant seeks this extension based on the following grounds (check all that apply):

☐ Volume and complexity of discovery materials requiring additional review
☐ Recently produced documents or supplemental disclosures necessitating analysis
☐ Unavailability of key witness(es) for deposition or consultation
☐ Scheduling conflicts with counsel's existing trial or hearing calendar
☐ Illness or medical emergency of party, counsel, or key witness
☐ Retention of expert witness and need for adequate time for expert analysis
☐ Ongoing settlement negotiations that may resolve part or all of the case
☐ Need for additional time to complete investigation or factual development
☐ Complexity of legal issues requiring additional research and briefing
☐ Change in counsel requiring reasonable transition period
☐ Third-party subpoena responses still outstanding
☐ Court-ordered mediation or ADR proceedings pending or recently concluded
☐ Other: [________________________________]

8. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND GOOD CAUSE

A. Factual Background

1. This action was commenced on [__/__/____] and involves claims for [________________________________].

2. On [__/__/____], the Court [________________________________], establishing the deadline of [__/__/____] for [________________________________].

3. Since the deadline was established, the following has occurred:
   [________________________________]
   (Provide detailed factual narrative explaining the specific circumstances necessitating the extension.)

4. [________________________________]

B. Good Cause Demonstration (Pre-Deadline Motion)

Movant demonstrates cause for the enlargement as follows:

[________________________________]
(Explain why the specific circumstances constitute good cause under the SDCL § 15-6-6(b) standard. Be specific about what has occurred and why additional time is necessary despite diligent efforts.)

C. Excusable Neglect (Post-Deadline Motion — if applicable)

☐ This section applies because the deadline has already passed.

Where a motion for enlargement is made after the original period has expired, SDCL § 15-6-6(b)(2) requires that the failure to act be the result of "excusable neglect." The South Dakota Supreme Court requires consideration of: (1) whether the neglect was excusable under the circumstances; (2) whether the movant has a meritorious claim or defense; (3) whether there would be prejudice to the non-movant; and (4) any other relevant factors. Colton Lumber Co. v. Siemonsma, 2002 SD 116.

The failure to act was the result of excusable neglect because:

[________________________________]

Movant has a meritorious [claim/defense] because:

[________________________________]

9. DILIGENCE OF MOVANT

Movant has exercised reasonable diligence in attempting to comply with the current deadline, as demonstrated by the following actions:

1. [________________________________]
2. [________________________________]
3. [________________________________]
4. [________________________________]

Despite these efforts, Movant is unable to meet the current deadline due to [________________________________].

10. ABSENCE OF PREJUDICE TO OPPOSING PARTY

The requested extension will not cause undue prejudice to [________________________________] (opposing party) because:

1. The extension requested is [____] days, which is modest relative to the overall duration of this litigation.
2. The trial date of [__/__/____] [☐ will not be affected / ☐ has not yet been set / ☐ may require adjustment].
3. All other scheduling order deadlines [☐ remain unaffected / ☐ will require corresponding adjustments as set forth in the proposed order].
4. The opposing party will not suffer any loss of evidence, witnesses, or strategic advantage.
5. [________________________________]

11. PRIOR EXTENSIONS

☐ No prior extensions have been requested or granted in this matter.

☐ The following prior extensions have been requested and/or granted:

The current request is distinguishable from prior extensions because [________________________________].

12. POSITION OF OPPOSING PARTY

Undersigned counsel [☐ has / ☐ has not] conferred with counsel for the opposing party regarding this Motion.

☐ Opposing counsel consents to the requested extension.
☐ Opposing counsel does not oppose the requested extension.
☐ Opposing counsel objects to the requested extension. The basis for the objection is: [________________________________].
☐ Opposing counsel has not responded despite reasonable efforts to confer on [__/__/____] via [☐ telephone / ☐ email / ☐ letter].
☐ The opposing party is self-represented, and Movant contacted them on [__/__/____] via [________________________________].

13. CERTIFICATE OF CONFERRAL

I, [________________________________], counsel for the Movant, hereby certify that on [__/__/____], I [☐ personally conferred / ☐ made a good faith effort to confer] with [________________________________], counsel for [________________________________], regarding the relief sought in this Motion.

The conferral occurred via [☐ telephone / ☐ email / ☐ in-person meeting / ☐ written correspondence].

The result of the conferral was: [☐ Agreement / ☐ No opposition / ☐ Objection / ☐ No response after good faith effort].

________________________________
[Attorney Name]

14. PROPOSED NEW DEADLINE AND SCHEDULING IMPACT

Movant respectfully requests that the Court extend the deadline as follows:

Impact on Other Deadlines:

☐ No other deadlines are affected by this extension.
☐ The following related deadlines should be correspondingly adjusted:

15. RELIEF REQUESTED

WHEREFORE, Movant respectfully requests that this Court:

1. Grant this Motion for Extension of Time;
2. Extend the deadline for [________________________________] from [__/__/____] to [__/__/____];
3. Adjust any dependent deadlines as set forth in the proposed order;
4. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

16. ATTORNEY SIGNATURE BLOCK

DATED this ___ day of ______________, 20___.

[________________________________]
[Law Firm Name]
[________________________________]
[Street Address]
[________________________________]
[City], South Dakota [________]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

By: ________________________________
    [Attorney Name]
    South Dakota Bar No. [________________________________]
    Attorney for [Plaintiff/Defendant]
    [________________________________]

17. PROPOSED ORDER

STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA                     )
                                           )  IN CIRCUIT COURT
COUNTY OF [________________________________])  [____] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
                                           )
                                           )  Civ. No. [________________]
[________________________________],        )
     Plaintiff(s),                         )
                                           )
vs.                                        )
                                           )
[________________________________],        )
     Defendant(s).                         )


         ORDER ON MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

     The Court, having considered the Motion for Extension of Time filed
by [________________________________] ("Movant"), and being fully
advised in the premises, hereby finds that good cause has been shown
for the requested extension.

     IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED as follows:

     1. The Motion for Extension of Time is GRANTED.

     2. The deadline for [________________________________] is hereby
extended from [__/__/____] to [__/__/____].

     3. [The following related deadlines are adjusted:
        a. [________________________________]: extended to [__/__/____]
        b. [________________________________]: extended to [__/__/____]]

     4. All other deadlines and orders remain in full force and effect
unless further modified by the Court.

     5. [Additional conditions, if any:
        ________________________________]

     Dated this ___ day of ______________, 20___.


     ________________________________
     Hon. [________________________________]
     Circuit Court Judge
     [____] Judicial Circuit

18. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], I served the foregoing Motion for Extension of Time and Proposed Order upon all counsel of record and/or parties by filing the same through the South Dakota Unified Judicial System Odyssey eFileSD electronic filing system pursuant to SDCL § 15-6-5(b) and SDCL § 16-21A, which automatically provides electronic notice to all registered users.

Service was additionally made by the following method(s) upon the following parties:

________________________________
[Attorney Name]

19. PRACTICE NOTES FOR SOUTH DAKOTA PRACTITIONERS

A. Key Provisions of SDCL § 15-6-6(b)

• Pre-Deadline Motions: The Court may enlarge the time with or without motion or notice when the request is made before the original deadline. A showing of "cause" is required.
• Post-Deadline Motions: After expiration, the movant must demonstrate "excusable neglect." South Dakota courts interpret this term liberally to promote resolution on the merits. Clarke v. Clarke, 423 N.W.2d 818 (S.D. 1988).
• Meritorious Defense Requirement: When seeking enlargement after the deadline, the movant should also demonstrate a meritorious claim or defense. Colton Lumber Co. v. Siemonsma, 2002 SD 116.
• Non-Extendable Deadlines: The Court may not extend time for actions under SDCL §§ 15-6-50(b), 15-6-59(b) and (d), and 15-6-60(b), except as specifically provided therein.

B. Computation of Time Under SDCL § 15-6-6(a)

• When the period is less than 11 days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays are excluded from computation.
• The day of the triggering event is not counted; the last day of the period is counted unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday.
• If the last day falls on a non-business day, the period extends to the next business day.

C. Additional Time for Mail Service

• Under SDCL § 15-6-6(e), when a party has the right or is required to act within a prescribed period after service and service is by mail, commercial delivery company, or electronic transmission, three (3) business days are added to the prescribed period.

D. South Dakota Judicial Circuits

South Dakota has seven judicial circuits:

• First Judicial Circuit: Bon Homme, Charles Mix, Clay, Douglas, Gregory, Hutchinson, Lincoln, Todd, Tripp, Turner, Union, Yankton Counties
• Second Judicial Circuit: Lincoln, Minnehaha, Turner Counties
• Third Judicial Circuit: Beadle, Brookings, Clark, Codington, Deuel, Grant, Hamlin, Hand, Jerauld, Kingsbury, Lake, McCook, Miner, Moody, Sanborn Counties
• Fourth Judicial Circuit: Aurora, Brule, Buffalo, Davison, Hanson, Hughes, Hyde, Lyman, Stanley, Sully Counties
• Fifth Judicial Circuit: Brown, Campbell, Day, Edmunds, Faulk, Marshall, McPherson, Potter, Roberts, Spink, Walworth Counties
• Sixth Judicial Circuit: Bennett, Butte, Custer, Fall River, Haakon, Harding, Jackson, Jones, Lawrence, Meade, Mellette, Pennington, Perkins, Shannon, Ziebach Counties
• Seventh Judicial Circuit: Corson, Dewey, Grant, Perkins, Roberts, Walworth Counties

E. Electronic Filing

• Under SDCL § 16-21A, electronic filing through the Odyssey eFileSD system is mandatory for all civil case types (except small claims) in all counties where available.
• All registered users must designate an email address for electronic service.
• Self-represented parties may be exempt from mandatory e-filing if a waiver is granted.

Sources and References

• SDCL § 15-6-6 (Time) — South Dakota Legislature
• SDCL Title 15, Chapter 06 (Rules of Procedure in Circuit Courts) — Justia
• SDCL § 16-21A (Circuit Court Electronic Filing Rules) — South Dakota Legislature
• Colton Lumber Co. v. Siemonsma, 2002 SD 116, 652 N.W.2d 731 — Justia
• Clarke v. Clarke, 423 N.W.2d 818 (S.D. 1988) — Justia
• South Dakota Unified Judicial System — UJS
• South Dakota eFiling Guidelines — UJS