Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Theresa K. Jensen v. South Dakota Department of Labor, et al.

IFP petition · Supreme Court of South Dakota, No. 31440 · judgment April 9, 2026


Pending

Questions presented

  1. Did the SD Supreme Court knowingly commit prejudicial and procedural due process errors by law with their 04.09.2026 Dismissal and 05.15.2026 Order Denial with case activity continuous since the12.31.2020 Circuit Court Appeal Win including an estopped Employer/lnsurer mention of settlement before Hearing, ruled Dismissal not appealable leaving an Injured SD worker without an opportunity to be heard - a hearing, and denying a 03.31.2026 Petition for Hearing - Appeal, and Sixth Circuit Court returning filed Responses, and left a pro se injured worker in need of care for this “outstanding condition” and “compensable” injury with submitted/accepted treating physicians support on file, that has negative effect and impact upon every working South Dakotan? and working American?

  2. More importantly, did the SD Supreme Court knowingly have the legal right to allow this circuit court split and conflicts/contractions with an Sixth Circuit Court Appeal Win Order 12.31.2020 by Her Honor Klinger on record for the SD DOL to hear this case, polar opposite with Sixth Circuit Court Staff 03.12.2026/03.23.2026 and Her Honor Northrup not in their jurisdiction/unfiled/no action 03.18.2026/received again with Circuit 03.23.2026 responses, going against the original ruling of this Sixth Circuit Court Order 12.31.2020 by Her Honor Klinger so sounded as unappealable Dismissal?

  3. Most importantly, did the SD Supreme Court have the legal right when filling their legal roles/responsibilities with access to the submitted/accepted discovery evidence, to knowingly allow through the SD DOL Officials' actions the release of an estopped Employer/lnsurer of their undisputable sole responsibilities where management repeatedly violated SD “protected worker” laws, the Dismissal/Denial of a pro se litigant of deserving fair treatment and the moving party released of the burden of proof making prejudicial errors by law, and leave an Injured SD worker in need of care for this “compensable” injury and “outstanding condition” that has negative effect and impact upon every working South Dakotan? and working American?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Theresa K. Jensen

For respondent
—

Case

Conference history
—

Proceedings

  1. Aug 12 2026
    Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 16, 2026)