Please note that our new website has been designed for a minimum resolution of 1024 x 768. If you use a lower resolution (i.e. 800 x 600), you should use the printer friendly version to read the opinions.

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.

In this case, the Court found that the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control properly exercised its authority under the Coastal Zone Management Act in denying a stormwater/land disturbance permit, and reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Court to the contrary.

The Court affirmed the circuit judge's ruling that the State had presented sufficient evidence of the chain of custody.

This is a disciplinary opinion in which the Court publicly reprimands a magistrate and bars the magistrate from future judicial service.

This is a disciplinary opinion in which the Court definitely suspends a magistrate.

In this case, the Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals finding that a tort claim premised on an alleged "bait and switch" is subject to an arbitration clause.

We granted a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeals decision in Corbett v. Weaver, 380 S.C. 288, 669 S.E.2d 615 (Ct. App. 2008). After a thorough review of the Appendix, record, and briefs, the writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.

In this capital murder case, Charles Christopher Williams (Appellant) appeals his sentence of death. Appellant argues (1) that once the jury disclosed its numerical division it was incumbent upon the trial judge to declare a mistrial; (2) that S.C. Code Ann. § 16-3-20 required the trial court to sentence Appellant to a life sentence because the jury could not agree on a sentence after “reasonable deliberation;” (3) the trial judge committed error by issuing a coercive Allen charge; and (4) the trial judge erred in refusing to declare a mistrial when a forensic psychiatrist’s testimony impermissibly bolstered and vouched for the solicitor’s decision to seek the death penalty.