On Wednesday, August 27, 2025, KELOLAND News reported that the South Dakota Supreme Court held a hearing to consider disciplinary action against Huron attorney Tucker Volesky for his representation of Bret Healy in a prolonged dispute over the Healy family ranch. The State Bar of South Dakota’s disciplinary board recommended a 30-day suspension of Volesky’s law license due to alleged violations of professional conduct rules.
The complaints against Volesky, filed in early 2024 by attorneys Jack Hieb, Lee Schoenbeck, and Circuit Judge Patrick Smith, were consolidated into a single investigation due to their connection to related lawsuits.
Volesky began representing Healy in January 2021, after Healy had lost two prior lawsuits concerning the ranch, which were decided by the South Dakota Supreme Court. In those cases, Healy was ordered to pay $83,295.42 in attorneys’ fees to defendants, with an additional $18,450 in appellate fees awarded by the Supreme Court.
After taking on Healy’s case, Volesky filed a federal lawsuit regarding the ranch ownership, which U.S. District Judge Roberto Lange dismissed. The dismissal was upheld by the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2022.
Volesky then initiated a federal lawsuit against the South Dakota Supreme Court and Circuit Judge Jon Sogn, who served as a justice in the prior Healy cases. During a November 2023 hearing, Judge Lange indicated he would dismiss this lawsuit and impose sanctions. Following the dismissal, Volesky filed a second amended complaint alleging that the Supreme Court justices, including Judge Sogn, had fabricated evidence in the initial Healy case, harming his client.
Additionally, Volesky sought to dismiss another state circuit court case he had filed for Healy. On December 29, 2023, Circuit Judge Patrick Smith ordered Volesky and Healy to explain why they should not face sanctions for violating a state law prohibiting actions meant to harass, delay, or increase litigation costs. After a hearing, Judge Smith imposed sanctions of $240,000 on Healy and $10,000 on Volesky. Volesky responded by filing a federal lawsuit against Judge Smith and appealing the sanctions to the South Dakota Supreme Court.
The disciplinary board argued that Volesky violated several professional conduct rules, including filing frivolous lawsuits without a legal or factual basis, lacking competence in representation, making false statements about judges, and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. The board also noted Volesky’s violation of client trust account regulations and his disregard for the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine, which limits federal court jurisdiction over state court judgments.
Volesky, represented by attorney Michael F. Tobin, apologized to the Supreme Court and expressed respect for the judiciary. He acknowledged the need for caution in making bold claims and suggested a mentor could guide him in the future.
Tobin proposed public censure instead of suspension, noting Volesky’s lack of prior complaints and his family’s legal background.
Chief Justice Steven Jensen questioned Volesky’s claim of no rule violations, expressing concern about the harm caused to Healy, including significant financial penalties.
The Supreme Court’s decision on Volesky’s discipline will be announced later.
Source: KELOLAND News
