With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". cases where no proceedings have occurred within one year from date of a Supreme Court order unless good cause is shown). And, it is unquestionably the plaintiffs duty to ensure that the case proceeds; this duty should not be placed on the defendant. Dakota Cheese, Inc. v. Taylor, 525 N.W.2d 713, 715 (S.D.1995). [¶ 11.] This Court cannot confirm that any activity occurred from the record provided. It was White Eagle’s duty to carry this case forward and to ensure verifiable activity existed to keep the case afloat. See Swenson, 1999 SD 61 at ¶ 10, 594 N.W.2d at 343. Permitting a case to remain idle for years without a single confirmable activity demonstrates a lack of diligence. Moreover, nothing in the record demonstrates “good cause” for denying the motion to dismiss. See id. at ¶ 15 (<HOLDING>); Sears v. McKee, 326 N.W.2d 107, 108

A: holding that if there is any issue of fact which remains upon a motion for summary judgment the motion must be denied
B: holding motion to dismiss under sdcl 151111 may be denied if good cause is shown
C: holding that lack of good faith is a valid basis to dismiss a chapter 7 case for cause under section 707a
D: holding lack of prejudice to the defendant is not good cause
B.