In a derivative action brought by one or more members to enforce a right of an unincorporated association, the association having failed to enforce a right which may properly be asserted by it, the complaint shall be verified and shall allege
Rule 23.1.Derivative Actions by Unincorporated Associations
Part IV: Parties · Last amended 2006 · Last verified July 16, 2026
In one sentenceRule 15-6-23.1 lets a member sue on behalf of an unincorporated association that has failed to enforce its own right, but only through a verified complaint alleging the member’s standing, the absence of collusive jurisdiction, and a detailed account of efforts made to get the association to act.
Full Text of Rule 15-6-23.1
(1) That the plaintiff was a member at the time of the transaction of which he complains or that his membership thereafter devolved on him by operation of law, and
(2) That the action is not a collusive one to confer jurisdiction on a court of the state which it would not otherwise have. The complaint shall also allege with particularity the efforts, if any, made by the plaintiff to obtain the action he desires from the directors or comparable authority and, if necessary, from the members, and the reasons for his failure to obtain the action or for not making the effort. The derivative action may not be maintained if it appears that the plaintiff does not fairly and adequately represent the interests of the members similarly situated in enforcing the right of the association. The action shall not be dismissed or compromised without the approval of the court, and notice of the proposed dismissal or compromise shall be given to members in such manner as the court directs.
Plain-English Summary
Sometimes an unincorporated association holds a right worth enforcing, but its own leadership will not pursue it. Rule 15-6-23.1 lets a member step in and bring that claim on the association’s behalf, in a derivative action modeled on the same idea as a shareholder derivative suit against a corporation.
The complaint carries real weight before the case can proceed. It must be verified, and it must allege that the plaintiff was a member when the disputed transaction occurred, or that membership later passed to them by operation of law, and that the action is not a collusive device meant to create jurisdiction that would not otherwise exist. The complaint must also describe, with particularity, what efforts the plaintiff made to get the directors or comparable authority — and the members, if necessary — to take the action the plaintiff wants, along with the reasons the plaintiff failed to get that action or did not try.
Two further safeguards run through the rule. The action cannot go forward if the plaintiff will not adequately represent the interests of similarly situated members. And like a class action, it cannot be dismissed or settled without court approval, with notice of the proposed dismissal or settlement going out to the membership.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can any member of an unincorporated association sue on the association’s behalf?
Only if the requirements of Rule 15-6-23.1 are met — a verified complaint alleging the member’s standing and the absence of collusive jurisdiction — and only if the plaintiff will adequately represent similarly situated members’ interests.
What must the complaint say about efforts to get the association to act first?
Rule 15-6-23.1 requires the complaint to allege with particularity the efforts, if any, the plaintiff made to obtain the desired action from the directors or comparable authority and the members, and the reasons for not obtaining or not attempting that action.
Does the complaint in this kind of action have to be verified?
Yes. Rule 15-6-23.1 requires the complaint to be verified before the derivative action can proceed.
Can this kind of lawsuit be used to manufacture jurisdiction that would not otherwise exist?
No. Rule 15-6-23.1 requires the complaint to allege that the action is not a collusive one brought to confer jurisdiction the court would not otherwise have.
Can a derivative action against an unincorporated association be dropped or settled quietly?
No. Rule 15-6-23.1 requires court approval before the action is dismissed or compromised, along with notice to the membership of the proposed dismissal or compromise.
Amendment History
—SD RCP, Rule 23(b), as adopted by Sup. Ct. Order March 29, 1966, effective July 1, 1966; SDCL, § 15-6-23(b); SD RCP, Rule 23.1, as added by Sup. Ct. Order No. 2, March 31, 1969, effective July 1, 1969; 2006, ch 287 (Supreme Court Rule 06-13).
Source & verification. Rule text and History are
reproduced verbatim from the South Dakota Codified Laws, published by the
South Dakota Legislative Research Council. Last verified July 16, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: derivative action unincorporated association south dakotamember sues association on its behalf sdrule 23.1 south dakotaassociation fails to enforce a right lawsuit