Proposal would set timelines for prevailing party to prepare and submit proposed orders in circuit court cases

A practice‑rules committee presented a proposed amendment to South Dakota procedure to streamline how proposed orders are prepared and submitted after a ruling. John Burke, chair of the practice rules revision committee, told the court the amendment aims to reduce delays when prevailing parties prepare orders but opposing parties are unresponsive.

Under the committee’s draft, the prevailing party would prepare a proposed order within a court‑specified interval; the opposing party would have five business days to object or suggest changes and the parties would attempt to confer. If they cannot agree, each side would have two days to submit separate proposed orders. Burke said the timeline is modeled to balance family‑law practitioners’ need for speed and other contexts that may tolerate slightly longer response times, and that the circuit court would retain discretion to modify the procedure in complex cases.

Justice questioning at the hearing raised a practical issue: many orders, particularly following contested hearings, include findings of fact and conclusions of law. Several justices and Burke discussed how this proposed rule would interact with the existing findings/conclusions process under Rule 52; Burke said the simplest practice would be for a judge who intends to require findings and conclusions to instruct parties to follow the Rule 52 timelines instead of the new proposed 15‑6‑58 procedure.

Burke said the proposal had input from circuit judges and trial practitioners and that the rule’s aim is to make it clearer to the judge when an order is ready to be signed (for example, by including “no objection to form” language where appropriate). The committee submitted the proposal for the court’s consideration.