The South Dakota Supreme Court recently ruled in the case of Steve and Monica Zirbel v. Deuel County Commissioners, affecting land access rights for property owners. The court vacated a previous ruling from the circuit court, which had denied the Zirbels a trial de novo regarding their access to two landlocked parcels. This decision is significant for landowners facing similar issues in accessing their properties.

The Zirbels purchased two parcels of land along Lake Alice in Deuel County, South Dakota, in 2023. However, neither parcel had direct access to a public road, leading to a dispute over access rights. After the Deuel County Board of County Commissioners denied their request for access, the Zirbels appealed to the circuit court, which ultimately upheld the Board's decision but reversed one aspect regarding the cost of an appraisal. The Zirbels challenged the circuit court's ruling, leading to the Supreme Court's involvement.

The Supreme Court's opinion, delivered by Justice Mark E. Salter, addressed several key issues. The court found that the circuit court had erred in applying the abuse of discretion standard instead of allowing a trial de novo, which is a full re-examination of the case. The court stated, "We vacate the circuit court’s order and remand for further proceedings, including a trial de novo." This ruling clarifies the rights of landowners seeking access to landlocked parcels under South Dakota law.

The Zirbels' case began when they attempted to access their East Parcel using what they believed was an unimproved existing section line right-of-way. However, they were informed by the Deuel County Sheriff that this right-of-way had been vacated. After hiring a land surveyor, the Zirbels confirmed that there was no record of the right-of-way being vacated. This led them to apply for statutory access through the Board, which initially denied their request, arguing that Lake Alice could serve as a public highway for access.

Upon appeal, the circuit court sided with the Zirbels, stating that Lake Alice could not be considered a passable public highway. The court found that the Zirbels' parcels were indeed isolated under the statutory definition, which mandates that owners of isolated tracts are entitled to an easement across adjacent lands to reach a public highway. The court remanded the case back to the Board for further proceedings.

After further hearings, the Board assessed damages for the right-of-way access, totaling $270,647, and attributed the cost of the appraisal to the Zirbels. The Zirbels contested this assessment, arguing that the damages were excessive and that they were unfairly burdened with the appraisal costs. The circuit court agreed to reverse the Board's decision regarding the appraisal costs but upheld the damages assessment.

The Zirbels appealed again, raising multiple issues, including the Board's failure to comply with procedural requirements and the constitutionality of the damages assessment. The Supreme Court's ruling emphasized the need for a proper evidentiary hearing to determine whether the section line right-of-way had indeed been vacated, which was a critical aspect of the case.

Justice Salter noted that the statutory right of access in South Dakota is designed to protect landowners from being landlocked without a means to access their property. The court's opinion highlighted the importance of ensuring that the rights of isolated landowners are upheld and that they have a fair opportunity to challenge decisions made by county boards.

This ruling has broader implications for property rights in South Dakota, particularly for landowners who find themselves in similar situations. It reinforces the principle that landlocked property owners have a statutory right to access their land and that county boards must follow proper procedures when determining access routes and assessing damages.

Looking ahead, the case will return to the circuit court for further proceedings, where the Board will need to provide evidence regarding the status of the section line right-of-way. The Zirbels and other affected landowners will be closely watching how this case unfolds, as it may set important precedents for future disputes involving land access in South Dakota.