Michael Enrico Kozlarek and John Marshall Mosser, both of King Kozlarek Law LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant. Thomas Allan Bendle, Jr., of Howell Gibson & Hughes, PA, of Beaufort, for Respondents Jasper County Treasurer and Jasper County Auditor. Walter Hammond Cartin and Jeffrey Evan Phillips, both of Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP, of Columbia, for Respondent Jasper County, South Carolina.

This case arises out a dispute related to levying taxes on a multi-county business park (MCBP) and the distribution of tax revenue pursuant to an agreement between Beaufort County and Jasper County. The City of Hardeeville appeals the circuit court's grant of partial summary judgment in favor of Jasper County, the Jasper County Auditor, and the Jasper County Treasurer. The City of Hardeeville argues the circuit court erred in finding (1) the MCBP agreement was valid and in compliance with constitutional and statutory law; (2) additional discovery was not necessary; (3) Hardeeville's consent to the MCBP agreement was not required; and (4) all property in the park, including the annexed property, is exempt from all ad valorem taxation.

Appellate Defender David Alexander, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of Columbia; and Solicitor David Matthew Stumbo, of Greenwood, all for Respondent.

Rickey B. Brown appeals his convictions for kidnapping, possession of a firearm by a person convicted of a violent crime, and pointing and presenting a firearm; and his sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Brown argues the trial court erred by refusing his request to charge not guilty by reason of insanity and guilty but mentally ill because the record contained evidence showing he lacked the mental capacity to distinguish between right and wrong and that he was unable to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law.

Wendell L. Hawkins, of Wendell L. Hawkins, PA, of Greer, for Appellants. James P. Walsh and John D. Harjehausen, both of Clarkson, Walsh & Coulter, P.A., of Greenville; and Donald Ryan McCabe, Jr., of McCabe, Trotter & Beverly, P.C., of Columbia, all for Respondent.

This case stems from several disputes within a residential aviation subdivision. Appellants contend the circuit court erred in granting the Chandelle Property Owners Association's (the POA) motion for partial summary judgment because association bylaws prohibited the POA from incurring debt in excess of $50,000 without a vote of the association and because the covenants and restrictions allowed annual assessments only for maintenance. Appellants challenge the circuit court's award of back assessments; award of the sums claimed in the POA's debt collection action; award of equitable relief prior to the consideration of compulsory legal counterclaims; and failure to require the POA to exhaust administrative remedies. Finally, Appellants argue the circuit court erred in awarding back assessments before discovery was complete, failed to recognize the claimed back assessments are "ostensibly attorney's fees" in disguise, and failed to consider the requirements of Jackson v. Speed, 326 S.C. 289, 486 S.E.2d 750 (1997).

Joel W. Collins, Jr., of Collins & Lacy, PC; and Thomas Wm. McGee, III, of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP, both of Columbia, for Appellant. James Edward Bradley, of Moore Bradley Myers, PA, of West Columbia, for Respondent.

Paul Roy Osmundson appeals the dismissal of his action under the Freedom of Information Act against School District 5 of Lexington and Richland Counties, arguing the circuit court erred in (1) granting a motion to dismiss and (2) denying a motion to reconsider.

Thomas S. Tisdale, Jr., of Law Offices of Thomas S. Tisdale, LLC, of Charleston, for Appellants. Peter Gunnar Nistad, of Charleston, for Respondent.

Lonnie Hamilton, III, and Zoe'Lia L. Culbreath (collectively, Appellants) filed a complaint against 301 Auto Parts, LLC, (301 Auto Parts) for (1) negligence, (2) gross negligence, (3) breach of warranty, and (4) violations of the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act. Appellants allege the second engine they purchased from 301 Auto Parts caused their Kia to catch fire. Appellants appeal the circuit court's order granting 301 Auto Parts' motion for summary judgment.

Warren W. Ariail and A. Bright Ariail, both of Law Office of A. Bright Ariail, LLC, of Charleston, for Appellants. Jaan Gunnar Rannik, of Epting & Rannik, LLC, and Michelle N Endemann, both of Charleston, for Respondent.

Restoration Specialists, LLC appeals the circuit's order denying its motion for relief from the entry of default and motion to compel arbitration in this case arising from a joint project to construct a parking garage for the federal government. Restoration also appeals the award of damages and prejudgment interest.

Desa Ballard, Harvey M. Watson, III, and Haley Alyse Hubbard, all of Ballard & Watson, Attorneys at Law, of West Columbia, for Appellants. R. Hawthorne Barrett, Mark Brandon Goddard, Lindsey Marie Behnke, and John Brian Kelchner, all of Turner Padget Graham & Laney, PA, of Columbia, for Respondents.

In this action for the dissolution of Southern Collection, LLC, Appellant, Emily P. Smith, asserts this court should reverse the circuit court's Rule 12(b)(6) and Rule 12(b)(1) dismissal(s). She further alleges the circuit court erred by concluding that Southern Collection, LLC was marital property, for dismissing the circuit court action as it relates to Defendants, Robert B. Smith and Sherry C. Smith, and that as a result, Appellant was denied her right to trial by jury.

Christopher Todd Brumback and Spencer Davis Langley, both of Brumback & Langley, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Melody Jane Brown, and Julianna E. Battenfield, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

In this criminal proceeding, Devin Z.E. Ruttle, was convicted of murder and unlawful carrying of a handgun at the trial court. On appeal, Ruttle alleges juror bias concealment and abuse of discretion for the trial court's denial of his motion for a new trial on this basis. Ruttle also alleges that the trial court erred in its denial of immunity under the Protection of Persons and Property Act and that the implied malice charge provided to the jury was reversible error when evidence was presented Ruttle acted in self-defense.

Elizabeth Anne Franklin-Best and Jillian Marie Lesley, both of Elizabeth Franklin-Best, P.C., of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Melody Jane Brown, and Julianna E. Battenfield, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Jimmy A. Richardson, II, of Conway, for Respondent.

In this criminal matter, Tiesh Rhue appeals her convictions for murder and obstruction of justice, arguing the trial court erred in (1) failing to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant, (2) admitting autopsy photographs, and (3) denying her motion for a directed verdict.

Appellate Defender Kathrine Haggard Hudgins, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Melody Jane Brown, and Julianna E. Battenfield, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Jimmy A. Richardson, II, of Conway, all for Respondent.

Alexander Rhue, Jr. appeals his convictions for murder and obstruction of justice, arguing the trial court erred in refusing to suppress evidence collected from search warrants.

J. Falkner Wilkes, of Oakland, MS, for Petitioner. Senior Assistant Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, of Columbia, for Respondent.

In this post-conviction relief (PCR) action, Marcus Dwain Wright (Petitioner) appeals the denial of his PCR application. He argues the PCR court erred in not finding trial counsel ineffective for failing to inform the trial court he had changed his mind about testifying and move to reopen the record. Petitioner contends trial counsel was deficient and he did not need to prove prejudice because the error was structural, pursuant to State v. Rivera, 402 S.C. 225, 741 S.E.2d 694 (2013).

Jaan Gunnar Rannik, of Epting & Rannik, LLC, and Michelle N Endemann, both of Charleston, for Appellant-Respondent. Henry E. Grimball, Robert Andrew Walden, and F. Cordes Ford, IV, all of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, of Charleston, for Respondent-Appellant. William Cole Shannon, of Columbia; and Russell Grainger Hines, W. Siau Barr, Jr., and Edward D. Buckley, Jr., all of Clement Rivers, LLP, of Charleston, all for Respondent Betty L. Beatty. F. Cordes Ford, IV, of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, and W. Siau Barr, Jr., of Clement Rivers, LLP, both of Charleston, for Respondent 304 Concord & Cumberland, LLC. F. Cordes Ford, IV, of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, of Charleston, for Respondents Paul A. Brim, James R. Clarke, Concord and Cumberland, LLC, Jo-Ann Cooper, Thomas R. Debnam, William D. Foster, Jr., Gene G. Foster, Freeman Waterfront Properties, LLC, Gregory J. Gardner, Kathy Garner, Diane Hall, Leo Hall, Barbara K. Henderson, Donald D. Leonard, Bonita K. Levin, Robert M. Levin, Mattison J. MacGillivray, Teresa MacGillivray, Thomas R. Mater, Mattellen, LLC, Nelia A. Patricio, Margaret C. Pope, Stuart D. Reeves, Betty Y. Segal, Robert Kenneth Seidl, II, Jennifer M. Seidl, Robert K. Seidl, Marion M. Simpson, Bea H. Smith, M. Bert Storey, Edward T. Strom, and Pamela L. Vaughn.

TCC of Charleston, Inc. (TCC) appeals the master in equity's (the master's) order denying its motions to amend a statement of account and for attorney's fees and granting motions to confirm an arbitration award, for summary judgment, for dismissal, to deposit funds, and for attorney's fees to Concord & Cumberland Horizontal Property Regime (the HPR) and unit owners of a condominium owned by the HPR. TCC also appeals the master's orders granting partial summary judgment and awarding attorney's fees to Betty Beatty, one of the unit owners, and awarding attorney's fees to the HPR and unit owners other than Beatty. TCC argues the master erred in finding TCC's mechanic lien was not timely served and dissolving the mechanic's lien due to an error on the statement of account, not allowing discovery before dismissing the lien, holding the HPR's deposit of a judgment into court stopped interest from accruing, denying TCC's motion for attorney's fees, and granting attorney's fees to the HPR. In its appeal, the HPR argues the circuit court erred in failing to vacate or modify TCC's arbitration award because the arbitration panel disregarded a sworn lien waiver and release when issuing its award to TCC, failed to issue a reasoned award, and allocated a portion of the award to a project that was not part of TCC's claim.

Willard D. Hanna, Jr., of Hanna Law, PA, of Murrells Inlet; Jonathan Patrick Hanna, of Neill Law Firm, PA, of Murrells Inlet; and Tobias Gavin Ward, Jr., and James Derrick Jackson, both of Tobias G. Ward, Jr., PA, of Columbia, all for Appellant-Respondent. Robert Bruce Wallace and Mary Duncan Shahid, both of Nexsen Pruet, LLC, of Charleston, for Respondent-Appellant.

This cross-appeal is about whether a parcel of land in the North Litchfield area of Georgetown County is encumbered by various alleged restrictions and whether those alleged restrictions are enforceable as restrictive covenants.

Jennifer Lynn Mook, of Law Office of Jennifer Mook, LLC, of Aiken, for Appellant-Respondent. Bruce A. Byrholdt, of Byrholdt Drawdy, LLC, of Anderson, for Respondent-Appellant. Robert Mills Ariail, Jr., of Law Office of R. Mills Ariail, Jr., of Greenville, for Respondent Jessie Walters. Amanda Stiles, of Greenville, for Respondent SCDSS.

Lucius Blake Walters (Father) and Barbara Jones, in her capacity as guardian ad litem (GAL), cross appeal a family court order terminating Father's parental rights to his two minor children (Children). Father argues the family court erred in finding clear and convincing evidence supported terminating his parental rights on three statutory grounds: (1) that Children were harmed, and due to the severity or repetition of the abuse or neglect, it was unlikely Father's home could be made safe within twelve months; (2) that Father willfully failed to support Children; and (3) that Children were in foster care for fifteen of the previous twenty two months. He also argues the family court erred in finding termination of parental rights was in Children's best interests. The GAL argues the family court erred in finding clear and convincing evidence did not show Father failed to remedy the conditions that caused Children's removal.

Carmen Vaughn Ganjehsani and Robert Wilder Harte, both of Richardson Plowden & Robinson, PA, of Columbia, for Appellant-Respondent. Adam Crittenden Bach, of Tonnsen Bach, LLC, and Emily R. Godwin, both of Greenville, for Respondent-Appellant.

Matthew Tillman, of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, of Charleston, for Appellants. Michael Pinckney Horger, Sr., of Michael P. Horger, LLC, of Orangeburg, for Respondents.

This case arises from a dispute over ownership of property located between a parcel owned by Timothy and Dana Judy and property owned by Alice Soto. Appellants assert the master-in-equity erred in finding the Judys owned the disputed property. Appellants further challenge the master's injunction requiring Soto to remove a fence from the disputed parcel and prohibiting Soto, Joseph B. Rodriguez, Matthew Rodriguez, Gwen Rodriguez, and Stephanie B. Wells (collectively, Appellants) from entering the property.

Val H. Stieglitz, III, of Maynard Nexsen LLP, of Columbia; Robert Bruce Wallace, of Maynard Nexsen, PC, of Charleston; Kirsten Elena Small, of Maynard Nexsen, PC, of Greenville; and Donald Falk, of San Francisco, CA, all for Appellants-Respondents. Ian S. Ford, Hunter H James, and Ainsley Fisher Tillman, all of Ford Wallace Thomson LLC, of Charleston, for Respondents-Appellants.

In these cross appeals, Appellant Respondent Developers (the Defendants) appeal the circuit court's order refusing to compel arbitration in a dispute arising from several contracts underlying the Defendants' sale of real estate in the Palmetto Bluff Development to Respondent Appellant Homeowners (the Plaintiffs). The Plaintiffs cross appeal the circuit court's order denying summary judgment on their declaratory judgment action.