Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
Court of Appeals Published Opinions - September 2005

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.

9-12-2005 - Opinions

4023 - Clark v. Aiken County Government

This is a workers' compensation case involving an award based on change of condition. We affirm the Workers' Compensation Commission and circuit court's findings that Clark sustained a change of physical condition resulting in permanent and total disability.

4024 - Stinecipher v. Ballington

This is an appeal from a family court order declining to terminate Thomas Ray Ballington's parental rights to his minor child, Christopher Austin Ballington (Austin). Austin's maternal grandparents, the Stineciphers, appeal, arguing the family court erred in failing to find Ballington, who is serving a life sentence for murdering Austin's mother, wilfully failed to support or wilfully failed to visit Austin. The Stineciphers further argue the family court erred in finding termiation was not in Austin's best interest. We reverse and remand.

9-19-2005 - Opinions

4025 - Blind Tiger, LLC v. City of Charleston

In this civil action, Blind Tiger, LLC argues the circuit court erred in dismissing its appeal from the decision of the Charleston County Board of Architectural Review as untimely. We affirm.

9-21-2005 - Opinions

4018 - Wellman v. Square D Company

This is an appeal from the denial of a motion to compel arbitration.

9-26-2005 - Opinions

4026 - Wogan v. Kunze

In this medical malpractice case, the court analyzes the novel issue of whether a private cause of action in favor of a Medicare recipient may be implied under 42 U.S.C. Section 1392(a), et seq. Appellant avers the cause of action for negligence is brought under state common law and not under The Medicare Act. Additionally, Appellant posits three theories for recovery: (1) whether an act of medical negligence may constitute a breach of fiduciary duty existing between a physician and a patient; (2) whether a physician's failure to file a Medicare claim may be asserted as a private cause of action under the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act; and (3) whether a physician's failure to file a Medicare claim may be asserted as a third party beneficiary contract claim.