Note: Beginning in June 2012, opinions will be posted as Adobe PDFs. You can download a free copy of Adobe Reader here.
The summary following each opinion is prepared to offer lawyers and the public a general overview of what a particular opinion decides. The summary is not necessarily a full description of the issues discussed in an opinion.5-4-2016 - Opinions
Knight Systems, Inc. (Knight Systems) and Robert L. "Buddy" Knight (collectively "Appellants") appeal the special referee's order ruling in favor of Palmetto Mortuary Transport, Inc. (Palmetto). Appellants argue the special referee erred in failing to find (1) the geographic restriction in the parties' covenant not to compete (the Covenant) is unreasonable and void, (2) the Covenant's territorial restriction is unsupported by independent and valuable consideration, (3) the Covenant is void as a matter of public policy, and (4) the Covenant became void after any breach by Palmetto. We reverse and remand.5403 - Marshall v. Dodds
In this medical malpractice case, Virginia and Todd Marshall (the Marshalls) appeal the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Dr. Kenneth A. Dodds; Charleston Nephrology Associates, LLC; Dr. Georgia Roane; and Rheumatology Associates, P.A. (collectively "Respondents"). The Marshalls argue the court erred in holding the statute of repose for a medical malpractice action begins to run after a medical professional's first alleged misdiagnosis. We reverse and remand.5-18-2016 - Opinions
Thomas Easterling appeals the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Burger King Corporation and Capital Restaurant Group, LLC (collectively "Burger King"), arguing the court erred in (1) not finding Burger King breached its duty to take reasonable action to protect him against a foreseeable risk of physical harm; (2) not finding Burger King had notice of and created an unreasonable and dangerous condition on its premises; (3) not finding Burger King breached its duty of care by deviating from its own internal policies; and (4) failing to properly rule upon the arguments presented and vacate the grant of summary judgment in light of his Rule 59(e), SCRCP, motion. We affirm.5-25-2016 - Opinions
Justin McBride appeals his conviction for first-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor, arguing the following: (1) the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over McBride because he was a juvenile ; (2) numerous evidentiary and jury charge issues; (3) the evidence presented was insufficient to prove the required elements of the crime; and (4) the trial court erred in excluding only a portion of McBride's statement. We affirm.5405 - State v. Williams
The State appeals the circuit court's order affirming the magistrate's dismissal of the driving under the influence charge against Scott E. Williams. The State contends because Williams was stopped without going through the driver's license checkpoint, the magistrate and circuit court erred in requiring the State to provide evidence to support the constitutionality of the checkpoint. The State also maintains the magistrate exceeded its authority in considering Williams's motion to dismiss, holding a pretrial preliminary hearing, and dismissing the case. We reverse and remand.