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.4-1-2008 - Opinions
In this sexually violent predator case, the Court of Appeals held the circuit court properly permitted an expert to testify at the defendant's commitment trial regarding prior sexually-related offenses not resulting in convictions as well as to a prior murder conviction on the grounds that the prejudicial nature of this evidence did not outweigh its probative value.4365 - James v. SCDPPS
Isiah James, Jr. appeals the Administrative Law Court’s (ALC) dismissal of his appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.4-3-2008 - Opinions
Allan S. Terry (Landowner) appeals the decision of the Coastal Zone Management Appellate Panel (Appellate Panel) affirming the order of the Administrative Law Court (ALC) which upheld the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management’s (OCRM) denial of his application for a recreational dock permit. We affirm.4367 - State v. Page
Jaleel V. Page appeals his convictions for conspiracy, attempted armed robbery, and possession of a pistol by a person under the age of 21. Page contends the circuit court erred in allowing the State to introduce evidence that a nontestifying co-defendant implicated Page in a statement to police where the statement did not fall into a hearsay objection, and Page’s counsel did not “open the door” to the admission of the statement. We affirm.4368 - Estate of Nicholson v. South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services
The Court of Appeals affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision to uphold the Department of Health and Human Services' denial of a son's request for an undue hardship waiver under the South Carolina Medicaid program. The Administrative Law Judge found the son was not "actually residing" with the mother at the time the hardship waiver was requested and, therefore, did not qualify for the waiver. The Court of Appeals agreed, holding the phrase "actually residing" requires physical presence in the decedent's home at the time the waiver is requested. Because the son was not living in the mother's home when he applied for the waiver, the waiver was properly denied.4-15-2008 - Opinions
Mr. T appeals the family court’s dismissal of his complaint to set aside a prior child support order and to determine paternity of two children born during his marriage with Ms. T. We reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing and development of the record on the matter.4-17-2008 - Opinions
This is an appeal of a grant of partial summary judgment to the defendants in an attorney malpractice action on the ground that defendants did not owe a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff regarding the payment of the proceeds of her late husband's life insurance policy.4371 - State v. Sims
In this criminal appeal, Appellant argues the trial judge committed reversible error by allowing a State’s witness to relate that a non-testifying third-party told her “Keith had murdered somebody,” since this evidence violated Rule 802, SCRE, the rule against hearsay.4-18-2008 - Opinions
In this quiet title action, Appellants challenge the grant of summary judgment to Defendant Daniel Duggan based on the trial court’s determination that Duggan, who purchased a half-interest in the subject property at a judicial sale and the remaining half-interest from another judicial sale purchaser, was protected under South Carolina Code section 15-39-870 from claims of defective service in the underlying foreclosure action.4-23-2008 - Opinions
Upstate Automotive Group appeals the circuit court’s refusal to dismiss the legal action and compel arbitration of Amos K. Partain’s tort claim. We reverse.4374 - Wieters v. Bon-Secours-St. Francis Xavier Hospital, Inc.
In this civil action, Appellants contend the trial court incorrectly ordered the hospital defendants to produce protected peer review information. Respondent avers the court should decline jurisdiction to hear this appeal from a discovery order. Further, Respondent argues that assuming discovery order is immediately appealable, the issue has been waived. Finally, Respondent states: (1) the information sought is not confidential; (2) the information sought does not concern peer review; and (3) the “original source” issue is inapplicable.4375 - RRR, Inc. v. Toggas
Thomas M. Toggas and Katherine Toggas (Appellants) appeal the circuit court’s order denying their motion to alter, amend or vacate judgment, and instead affirming the findings of the jury. We affirm.4376 - Wells Fargo Bank v. Turner
Richard Freeman appeals the special referee’s order setting aside a judicial sale. Freeman contends Wells Fargo Bank, NA (the Bank) failed to meet its burden of proof to vacate the sale because it failed to present evidence as to the value of the property.4-24-2008 - Opinions
This is an appeal from the grant of summary judgment to the remaining defendant in a medical malpractice action on the ground that plaintiffs did not provide evidence the defendant was a proximate cause of the patient’s injury.4-25-2008 - Opinions
Colin Thomson (Husband) appeals from the final order of the family court granting Amy Thomson (Wife) a divorce on the ground of physical cruelty and ordering him to pay: (1) $99 per week in child support; (2) one-half of accumulated marital debt; (3) thirty-six percent of the children’s future uninsured medical bills; and (4) $5,000 toward Wife’s attorneys’ fees. Husband also appeals the court’s declaration that Wife owned all the property in her possession.4-28-2008 - Opinions
Thomas Bradford appeals the trial court’s finding he breached a real estate contract with the Madrens. Bradford contends the award of damages was not supported by sufficient evidence and the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss pursuant to Section 40-11-30 of the South Carolina Code (2006). We affirm.4380 - Vortex Sports & Entertainment v. Ware
The court addresses, inter alia, an evidentiary issue and a set-off in this action for aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference with contract.