Derek C. Gilbert, of Harvey & Battey, of Beaufort, for appellants. Alysoun Meree Eversole, of Sherwood N. Fender & Assoc., of Beaufort, for respondent.

In this case, the heirs of Smashum appeal the trial court's grant of summary judgment to Fender, contending the trial court erred in finding the parties were not co-tenants and in not applying an ouster analysis to Fender’s claims.

Howard S. Sheftman and J. Alton Bivens, both of Finkel & Altman, of Columbia, for appellant. Pearce W. Fleming, Henry Guyton Murrell and David Randolph Whitt, all of Pearce W. Fleming, of Columbia, for respondents.

This is a foreclosure action between family members seeking to determine whether a note was satisfied by its original holder.

Russell H. Putnam, Jr., of Hinesville, GA, for appellant. Kelli Lister Sullivan; and John S. Nichols, both of Columbia, for respondent.

This case involves the question of whether ERISA prevents a former wife from waiving her interest in her ex-husband’s retirement benefits and whether a former wife may shield herself from her waiver by arguing the wavier violated ERISA .

Grady L. Beard and Marcy J. Lamar, both of Sowell, Gray, Stepp & Laffitte, of Columbia, for appellants. Sherod H. Eadon, Jr., of Lee, Eadon, Isgett & Popwell, of Columbia, for respondent.

This case involves an appeal from the Workers' Compensation Commission, in which the commission found Cassidy totally and permanently disabled.

Phillip E. Reeves, of Gallivan, White & Boyd, of Greenville; and Robert Scott Sprouse, of Seneca, for appellant-respondent. Perry H. Gravely, of The Gravely Law Firm, of Pickens, for respondents-appellants; and Bradley A. Norton, of Fedder, Norton, Ballenger & Enderlin, of Walhalla, for respondents.

This case involves an access way from a public road to a lake and questions whether it should be a public road maintained by Oconee County, and also questions who has the benefit of using it.

Assistant Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek, of SC Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka and Assistant Attorney General Melody J. Brown, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for respondent.

This criminal appeal alleges the judge erred in refusing to suppress evidence taken from Appellant’s sister’s home, abused his discretion by refusing to direct a verdict of acquittal, erred by admitting evidence of bullets not connected to the crime, and erred in admitting evidence of the sister’s eviction from a housing complex.

H. Fred Kuhn, Jr., of Moss & Kuhn, of Beaufort, for appellant. Darrell T. Johnson, Jr., of Hardeeville, for respondent.

This appeal is from a finding that Pittman has an easement by prescription for the use of a road over property belonging to Lowther by virtue of his adverse use for a period of 20 years.

James C. McLeod, Jr., of Florence, for appellant. N. David DuRant, of Surfside Beach, for respondent.

This case involves whether local zoning ordinances permit Appellant to build steps over beach dunes.

James D. Mosteller, III, of Bedingfield & Williams, of Barnwell, for appellant. B. Michael Brackett, of Columbia, for respondent.

This case presents the question of whether the will of a testator who died in 1954 leaving a life estate in substantial real property with a remainder to the life tenant’s “child or children” intended that language to include an admittedly illegitimate child of the life tenant. Also involved is whether the law of 1954 or whether the law of 1995 (the date of death of the life tenant) is controlling.

Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of SC Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for petitioner. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson and Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr.; all of Columbia; and Solicitor Druanne Dykes White, of Anderson, for respondent.

Robert T. Williams, Sr., of Williams, Hendrix, Steigner & Brink, of Lexington, for appellant. W. Lawrence Brown and Robert M. Bell, both of Bell, Surasky & Brown, of Langley, for respondents.

In this action, appellant contends the circuit judge erred in determining that Section 38-53-100(D) authorized the Clerk of Court for Aiken County to collect $150.00 annually for each license held by a bondsman rather than $150.00 annually for each individual bondsman.

Assistant Appellate Defender Tara S. Taggart, of SC Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for appellant. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson and Assistant Attorney General Melody J. Brown, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for respondent.

This criminal appeal considers two issues: (1) whether drug evidence should have been suppressed because of problems with the chain of custody; and (2) whether the trial judge should have granted a directed verdict on the charge of distribution of crack cocaine within the proximity of a school where the school was an adult education center.

J. Marvin Mullis, Jr., of Columbia, for appellant. Julius W. McKay, II, and Kathleen Devereaux Schultz, both of McKay, McKay, Settana & Addison, of Columbia, for respondents.

In this medical malpractice case, the appellant alleges error in the trial judge’s exclusion of relevant testimony regarding the qualifications of appellant’s expert witness and in refusing to allow appellant to cross-examine respondent using a treatise which respondent recognized as an authority on emergency medicine.

Joseph O. Burroughs, Jr., of Singleton, Burroughs & Young, of Conway; and J. Michael Taylor, of Golden, Taylor, Potterfield & Barron, of Columbia, for appellant. Anita Ruth Floyd, of Conway, for respondent.

In this domestic case, Barbara G. Long (the wife) appeals from the family court’s award of rehabilitative alimony, arguing the court should have awarded her permanent, periodic alimony. She also challenges the family court's equitable distribution of marital assets.

Brenda R. Reddix-Smalls, of Columbia, for appellant. Ralph W. Barbier, III, and Joseph M. Kahn, both of Nexsen, Pruet, Jacobs & Pollard, of Columbia, for respondent.

In this action brought pursuant to the South Carolina Freedom of Information Act, appellant contends the trial court erred in holding that the appellant’s request for disclosures constituted “Trade Secrets” requiring a protective order.

Richard J. Morgan and Robyn K. Wietecha, both of McNair Law Firm, of Columbia, for appellant. Laura Puccia Valtorta, of Columbia, for respondent.

In this non-payment of wages case, the appellant asserts the trial court committed error by trebling respondent’s damages, awarding attorney’s fees, and refusing to charge appellant’s request for charge.

Edward L. Graham, of Florence, for appellant. Robert H. Hood, Hugh W. Buyck and D. Nathan Hughey, all of Hood Law Firm, of Charleston, for Respondents.

In this medical malpractice case, the appellant alleges error in the trial judge’s granting of a motion to dismiss Dr. Thomas W. Phillips and Drs. Coker, Phillips and Haswell, P.A. The issues involved in the case are: (1) The applicability of res judicata and collateral estoppel based on identity of the parties in a prior action and a contention that the issues in the prior action were not adjudicated on the merits; (2) Contentions by appellant that the trial judge erred in granting the motion to dismiss because the prior action was dismissed with the consent of counsel and the minor plaintiff did not receive adequate and fair representation of his interests.

Timothy W. Bouch and G. Hamlin O'Kelley, III, both of Charleston, for appellants. Arthur G. Howe, Barry Krell and Jerry N. Theos, all of Charleston; and John P. Freeman, of Columbia, for respondents.

Appellants allege the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to respondents, where a partnership withdrawal document contained no merger clause and the issue of the withdrawing partner’s fraud and negligent misrepresentation was supported by sworn testimony. Additionally, appellants allege the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to respondents in this partnership withdrawal case, by relying on a later drafted merger clause, disregarding parol evidence of fraud and negligent misrepresentation by the withdrawing partner.

David Eugene Massey, of Columbia, for appellants. Kirby D. Shealy, III, of Baker, Ravenel & Bender, of Columbia, for respondent.

Appellants allege the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to respondents, thereby rejecting the need for a warning under strict products liability and a duty to warn under negligence law.