PIERRE - The South Dakota Supreme Court has ruled that a woman was negligent when she turned into the path of another vehicle that was passing her.

The high court's 3-2 ruling overturns a jury verdict that awarded no damages in a 2001 traffic crash.

The circuit judge presiding in the trial should have ruled as a matter of law that a woman was negligent when she turned into the path of another vehicle that was passing her, the court majority said. The judge should have granted a new trial on the issue of damages, the justices said.

But the two dissenting justices said there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's decision, and the high court should not interfere with the jury's verdict.

The accident occurred on Dec. 23, 2001, when Edith G. Harmon was driving on South Dakota Highway 34 from Spearfish to Pierre, according to court records. Harmon pulled up behind a caravan of about 10 vehicles that were traveling at about 10 mph as they accompanied horseback riders who were off to the left of the road.

Harmon passed the caravan at about 35 mph at the bridge over the Cheyenne River. At the same time, Anita M. Washburn, who was driving the lead vehicle in the caravan, decided to turn left off the highway onto an approach. The two vehicles collided as Washburn was making the left turn.

Harmon's vehicle flipped over the top of the other vehicle. Harmon's husband, who was driving another vehicle, took her to a hospital in Pierre, where she was examined and had glass removed from her arm. She was later treated for other alleged injuries.

Harmon sued Washburn, but a jury ruled in Washburn's favor.

Harmon asked Circuit Judge James W. Anderson to rule as a matter of law during the trial that Washburn was negligent, but he rejected the request. After the jury verdict, the judge again rejected Harmon's request for a new trial or a ruling that Washburn was negligent.

The Supreme Court majority said testimony at the trial showed Washburn was negligent because she violated a state law that requires drivers to signal at least 100 feet before making a turn. Harmon contended Washburn never signaled, and Washburn testified that she signaled at most 44 feet before the turn, the justices said.

That meant the judge should have ruled that Washburn was negligent, the high court said.

Harmon passed legally, so she did not share in the negligence, the justices said.

The judge also erred at the end of the trial by not ruling that Washburn was negligent and ordering a new trial on damages, the Supreme Court majority said.

The two dissenting justices said Washburn was clearly negligent, but Harmon could not recover damages if her negligence contributed to the accident. The Supreme Court should not interfere with the jury, which considered those issues and decided in favor of Washburn, the dissent said.