John O. McDougall, of McDougall & Self, of Sumter; J. Leeds Barroll, IV; and John S. Nichols, both of Columbia, for appellant. J. Mark Taylor, of Moore, Taylor & Thomas, of West Columbia, for respondent.

This case presents the issue of whether the former wife’s current lifestyle is “tantamount to marriage” for purposes of terminating alimony and whether an oral agreement to terminate alimony is binding on the former wife.

William S. Brown, of Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, of Greenville, for appellant. David W. Goldman, Diane M. Rodriguez and Kristi F. Curtis, all of Bryan, Bahnmuller, Goldman & McElveen, of Sumter, for respondent.

This medical malpractice case involves the question of whether the trial court failed to charge the jury the proper standard of care, erred in allowing opinion testimony on the standard of care, erred in failing to grant a directed verdict, and erred in failing to grant a new trial.

Jeffrey Falkner Wilkes, of Greenville, for appellant. Scott Michael Mongillo, of Mt. Pleasant; Russell D. Ghent, O. Doyle Martin and Cari W. Hicks, all of Leatherwood, Walker, Todd & Mann, of Greenville, for respondent.

This is an appeal from a breach of contract action.

Andrea E. White and Charles J. Boykin, both of Duff, Turner, White & Boykin, of Columbia, for appellant. W. Allen Nickles, III, Carl L. Solomon and Dona Guffey, all of Gergel, Nickles & Solomon, of Columbia, for respondent.

This appeal involves whether it was appropriate for the Richland County School Board to terminate a teacher's employment.

Richard H. Rhodes, of Burts, Turner, Rhodes & Thompson, of Spartanburg, for appellant. William Jeffrey McGurk, of Spartanburg, for respondent. Guardian Ad Litem: David H. Hanna, Sr., of Turnipseed, Hanna & Boan, of Spartanburg.

In this domestic case, Laura Brooks Foster (the mother) appeals from the family court’s grant of child custody to William Heath Foster (the father). She further appeals the family court’s award of attorney fees to the father and the court’s refusal to hold the father in contempt for failure to pay child support.

Stephen E. Carter, of Bethea, Jordan & Griffin, of Hilton Head Island, for appellant. Stephen Bull; and Edward E. Bullard, both of Hilton Head Island, for respondent.

This case involves the interpretation of the grant of an easement.

J. Rene Josey and David W. Keller, Jr., both of Turner, Padget, Graham & Laney, of Florence, for appellant. Daryl James Corbin, of Florence, for respondent.

This appeal arises out of a breach of contract action where the court below found the buyer of commercial real estate was required to pay a real estate broker a sales commision on his purchase.

James B. Jackson, Jr., of Yarborough, Hutto & Jackson, of Orangeburg, for appellant. Lewis C. Lanier, of Lanier & Knight, of Orangeburg, for respondent.

This appeal arises out of an action for declaratory judgment to determine if curbing is permitted pursuant to restrictive covenants.

Samuel Darryl Harms, of Greenville, for appellant. Karl S. Brehmer and J. Austin Hood, both of Brown & Brehmer, of Columbia, for respondent.

This appeal involves: 1) a question of whether the attorney-client privilege protects conversations between a defendant and counsel for an underinsured motorist carrier and, if so, whether a motion for a protective order is required pursuant to Rule 30(j), SCRCP, to preserve the privilege; and 2) whether a nurse practitioner is qualified to diagnose an injury and give an opinion concerning the cause of an injury.

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 and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Charles H. Richardson, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Harold W. Gowdy, III, of Spartanburg, for respondent.

This criminal appeal alleges error in the trial judge’s denying Appellant’s motion for dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Interstate Detainers Act and in refusing to declare a mistrial after testimony regarding an alleged prior bad act was admitted.

W. Andrew Gowder, Jr., of Pratt-Thomas, Epting & Walker, of Charleston, for appellant. Joseph W. Ginn, III, of Charleston, for respondents.

This civil action involves whether the circuit court erred in finding that the respondents’ use of a road was under a claim of right, entitling the respondents to a prescriptive easement.

Chief Attorney Daniel T. Stacey, 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 Deborah R. J. Shupe, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Druanne Dykes White, of Anderson, for respondent.

This case involves a defendant’s right to withdraw a guilty plea.

Ronald L. Richter, Jr., of Charleston, for appellant. Alex B. Cash, of Rosen, Rosen & Hagood, of Charleston, for respondent.

This case questions the authority of the family court to award one spouse more than 50% of the other spouse’s military retirement benefits.

Kelly Knight Byrd and Jennifer L. Queen, both of Knight Law Firm; and Mark Alan Leiendecker, all of Summerville, for appellant. 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 Walter M. Bailey, Jr., of Summerville, for respondent.

This criminal appeal considers four issues: 1) whether the trial court properly admitted evidence of prior bad acts; 2) whether the trial court properly admitted hearsay corroboration evidence concerning prior bad acts; 3) whether the trial court erred in admitting reply testimony for the purpose of impeachment; and 4) whether the trial court improperly excluded evidence pursuant to the Rape Shield Statute.

Stephen B. Samuels and Thomas P. Bellinger, both of McWhirter, Bellinger & Associates, of Lexington, for appellant. E. Ros Huff, Jr., and Mark Davis Cauthen, both of Huff, Cauthen & Martin, of Columbia, for respondents.

Did employer have sufficient knowledge of claimant’s prior injury to ratify his employment and thus qualify him for worker’s compensation benefits despite his false representation on his employment application?

Gerald F. Smith, of Columbia, for appellant. J. Charles Ormond, Jr., of Holler, Dennis, Corbett, Ormond & Garner, of Columbia, for respondent.

This case questions whether a written document creates an employment contract for a specific term or is an offer of employment at will.

S. Jackson Kimball, III, of Rock Hill, for appellant. Carolyn W. Rogers, of Harper, Peterson, Rogers & Reno, of Rock Hill, for respondents.

This appeal involves whether the probate court acted within its subject matter jurisdiction in determining paternity for purposes of establishing the heirs to decedent’s estate and, if so: 1) whether the decedent’s acknowledgement of a child as his own, together with his subsequent marriage to the child’s mother, is sufficient to give rise to the child’s right to inherit from the decedent; 2) whether res judicata and/or collateral estoppel prohibited relitigation of the issue of paternity in light of findings contained in a prior decree divorcing decedent from claimant’s mother; and 3) whether the probate court erred in giving conclusive effect to scientific evidence of paternity.

B. Michael Brackett, of Columbia, for appellant. William C. Tindal, of Bell, Tindal & Freeland, of Lancaster, for respondent.

This action to quiet title involves the effectiveness of a handwritten document to convey real property from a decedent to his daughter.

Assistant Appellate Defender Eleanor Duffy Cleary, 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 W. Rutledge Martin, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for respondent.

Questions the sufficiency of an indictment to vest the trial court with subject matter jurisdiction, and also whether the trial court erred by failing to determine that defendant was indigent for waiver of counsel purposes.

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 Senior Assistant Attorney General Harold M. Coombs, Jr., all of Columbia; and Solicitor Barbara R. Morgan, of Aiken, for respondent.

Andre Tufts appeals his conviction for criminal sexual conduct in the third degree, asserting the trial judge erred in admitting improper evidence of his character.

Johnnie W. Baxley, III, of Pratt-Thomas, Epting & Walker, of Charleston, for appellant. Roy A. Howell, III, and Kristen L. Barr, both of Mt. Pleasant, for respondent.

This appeal addresses a coverage dispute between an assigned risk carrier and a voluntary insurer in the workers’ compensation context.

Robert C. Childs, III, and Laura W.H. Teer, both of Mitchell, Bouton, Yokel & Childs, of Greenville, for appellant. Stephanie H. Burton and Elizabeth J. Brady, both of Gibbes & Burton, of Greenville, for respondents.

This civil action involves whether the circuit court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Regions Bank and Richard Furman. The theories analyzed are: breach of contract, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion and fraud.

Karl S. Brehmer and J. Austin Hood, both of Brown & Brehmer, of Columbia, for appellant. Charles V. Verner and James S. Verner, both of Harley & Verner, of Newberry, for respondent.

This appeal involves: 1) whether the defendant properly plead its defense of immunity under the Tort Claims Act; and 2) whether the trial court properly granted a directed verdict to the defendant based on its immunity under the Tort Claims Act.