People ex rel. C.F.
South Dakota Supreme Court
708 N.W.2d 313 (2005)
- Written by Brittany Frankel, JD
Facts
A mother (plaintiff) believed in corporal punishment and spanked her three minor children. About four times a year, the mother would spank her minor daughter, C.F., with a belt, as a last resort in order to discipline her. Following an incident with C.F.'s sister, the Department of Social Services (department) visited with the mother and stepfather. The department required that the mother and stepfather attend parenting classes in order to keep the children in the home. The parenting classes taught the mother and stepfather to use a sliding scale for discipline and to always start with the least violent form of discipline. A few months later, an incident with C.F. led the department to visit the mother's home again. C.F. had been acting out and was grounded for weeks, but the mother found that the grounding was not improving C.F.'s behavior. On a day when C.F. had been particularly bad, the mother eventually resorted to spanking C.F. six times with a belt over her clothes. The spanking left no marks or bruises. Even still, C.F. was removed from the home. The State of South Dakota (defendant) filed an abuse and neglect petition on behalf of C.F., and a hearing was held. The trial court found C.F. was abused and neglected based upon her mother striking her six times with a belt. The mother appealed the trial court’s findings.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gilbertson, C.J.)
Concurrence (Meierhenry, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
