I hear this was Nancy Turbak's case...

Someone tells me that this case was being helmed by Senator Nancy Turbak on Eugene Kent's behalf:
A man awarded $27.4 million by a jury after a federal court trial in Aberdeen now stands to get nothing.

In 2005, Eugene Kent of Sioux Falls won a civil lawsuit against United of Omaha, an insurance company with which he once worked on a health insurance policy. But the St. Louis-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has overturned the decision.


Earlier this month, the Court of Appeals overturned Kent's loss of income claim, leaving him with nothing. Among other things, the appeals court noted in its decision that “the South Dakota Supreme Court concluded that Kent had violated 'seven provisions of the Insurance Code,' and that the decision to revoke his license was not 'too harsh a penalty' based on Kent's misrepresentations, fraudulent conduct and general dishonesty.”
Read it all here in the Aberdeen American News. A review of the prior hearing indicates that what I heard could be true:


[2006 DSD 7

United States District Court
District of South Dakota—Southern Division
CIV 02-4214


Nancy J. Turbak, Turbak Law Office, P.C., Watertown, SD
Attorney for Plaintiff.

What does it mean politically? Not a darned thing. But it does confirm that Nancy is one of the top trial lawyers in in this state, as I've heard more than once. Even if her client doesn't get to keep the $27.4 million.

Speaking of Senator Turbak, in addition to her legal duties, she did some pro bono defense work on behalf of our congresswoman in the Argus Leader today:
Critics need to think again, says state Sen. Nancy Turbak, D-Watertown.

"What the radio ads really suggest is that Rep. Herseth Sandlin should be trying to micromanage local flood relief or at least exploiting that disaster for photo ops instead of meeting with scientists and European political leaders to work on the most immediate environmental challenge facing the planet Earth," Turbak said. "That kind of small thinking gets South Dakota nowhere. The cheap shots taken at the congresswoman are disappointing but not too surprising, since they apparently come from folks who love to criticize whatever she does, wherever she goes, and even how she wears her hair."
Read that in David Kranz's Argus Leader column.


Anonymous said…


Say what did House Speaker Tom Diedrick do with his law degree
Anonymous said…
This blog seems to have an extra helping of pointless venom when the victims are women.

Ted Klaudt would be proud. What's he doing with his free time these days? And why's Roger Hunt running around free like Ted?
Anonymous said…
There is more than one Ted running round free today. The other one lives in Massachusetts and works in Washington DC.

Sorry, couldn't resist!
Anonymous said…
But South Dakota's Big Teddy's got a lot more Klaudt.
Anonymous said…
Hey Ted! Got eggs?
Anonymous said…
Nancy Turbak made a lot of lemonade out of this lemon of a case. The grounds the 8th circuit used to reverse the judgment had nothing to do with Nancy's representation, which was top notch.

It's not easy to get a South Dakota jury to award big money to a Plaintiff. I believe this was the single biggest jury verdict in South Dakota history. But unless the US Supreme Court agrees to hear the case and then overturns the 8th circuit, it's over. It's doubtful that this is the type of case the US Supreme Court will hear.
Anonymous said…
Well partisanship aside, this cannot be good news for Nancy - she's something like $9 million poorer as a result.
PP said…
"But it does confirm that Nancy is one of the top trial lawyers in in this state, as I've heard more than once. Even if her client doesn't get to keep the $27.4 million."

That's venom?

I thought I was actually being complimentary. I'd hire her.
Anonymous said…
Not too surprising she'd represent a crooked insurance salesman. Anything for big money, right?? Also, not surprising she'd come to the aid of her tree-hugging friend, Queen Stephanie.
Anonymous said…
Turbak is in bed with both Herseth and Pelosi. Women power is very high on her agenda. It helped win
her a seat in the senate as she did
alot of campaigning to get the young women's vote at Brookings.
Anonymous said…
8:13 - Please explain how Brookings has anything to do with Nancy Turbak's election.
RealFakeNews said…
Nancy Turbak is a top trial lawyer in this state. Go ahead and hate her, accuse her "girl power" or whatever. But if you're ever in big trouble, you'd want her represnting you.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said…
yes, she's a big supporter of, ahem, women
Anonymous said…
Kranz loves Turbak and will put her in print constantly because they are both from Watertown area and both big liberals
PP said…
7:19, that's not called for.
Anonymous said…
PP is just jealous of Turbak becuase he couldn't get into law school.
PP said…
Really, 10:49? That shows how much you know.

I got early acceptance to Creighton because of my more than decent LSAT score.

It was *sniff* only USD that didn't love me.
Anonymous said…
I worked with Nacy Turbak for the first time this session and found her to be exremely intelligent and very personable. If she wants a future in poltics she would go far. But it was my impression that after the legislature she will porbably return to her law practice. That's too bad.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: Frederick not in SDGOP Chair Race

A strategic move by Sutton. Good for him, bad for Dems.