L. Henry McKellar, Christian Stegmaier, and Suzanne C. Boulware, of Columbia, for Appellant. Sally M. Purnell and Matthew P. Utecht, of Greenville, for Respondents.

Appellant Stephen Anvar, M.D., appeals from an order of the circuit court granting summmary judgment to the Respondents, Greenville Hospital System and others, on his claim for civil conspiracy. The case arises out of Anvar's claim that he was wrongfully suspended and placed on probation after Respondents found he improperly used a medical device that was not approved for use on patients outside of an approved clinical trial.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, Senior Assistant Attorney General Norman Mark Rapoport, of Office of the Attorney General, of Columbia, and Solicitor I. McDuffie Stone, III, of Beaufort, for Appellant. Acting Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, of Columbia, for Respondent.

The State appeals from the grant of a new trial to Arthur Franklin Smith, whom the jury convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct. The State contends the trial court abused its discretion by granting Smith a new trial based on the alleged coaching of the victim when Arthur failed to object contemporaneously at the time the alleged coaching occurred.

Richard H. Rhodes and M. Noel Turner, of Spartanburg, for Appellant-Respondent. William G. Rhoden, of Gaffney, for Respondent-Appellant. David Michael Collins, Jr., of Spartanburg, for Guardian Ad Litem.

This is a cross-appeal from a divorce decree. The isssues on appeal concern the grounds for divorce, custody of the parties' children, alimony, attorney fees, and payment of the marital debts.

Donald Bruce Clark,of Charleston; J. Mark Taylor, of West Columbia; and Robert Rosen, of Charleston, for Appellant. John Graham Altman, III, of Hanahan, and D. Mark Stokes, of North Charleston, for Respondent. Graham Edward Hawkins, III, of Charleston, Guardian Ad Litem.

Vicky Griffith (Mother) appeals the family court's order awarding Ernest Bartlett Altman (Father) custody of their minor child (Child). Mother argues the family court erred in: (1) awarding custody to Father without requiring him to prove a substantial change of circumstances; (2) awarding custody to Father absent a substantial change of circumstances; (3) awarding custody to Father even though Father repeatedly deceived the family court order about his drug use; (4) admitting Dr. Elizabeth Baker Gibbs' testimony on issues other than whether Father physically abused Child; (5) finding Mother and her family made repeated unfounded accusations and charges against Father; (6) punishing Mother for exercising her right to negotiate visitation through her attorney; (7) finding Father had a stronger focus on the daily welfare and care of Child; and (8) determining that awarding Father custody was in the best interest of Child.

Thomas S. Tisdale, Jr., and David Jay Parrish, of Charleston, for Appellant. J. Rutledge Young, III, of Charleston; Kenneth R. Young, Jr., of Sumter; and R. Wade Marionneaux, of Atlanta, GA, for Respondent..

This case presents the issue of whether a juror's admitted misconduct was so prejudicial that it deprived the parties of a fair and impartial jury trial.

Lake Eric Summers, of Columbia, for Appellant. Douglas H. Westbrook, of Charleston, for Respondent.

The Department of Corrections has a longstanding policy that an inmate's pending grievance is terminated upon his release from prison. The case questions whether constitutional due process considerations trump that policy and require the department to continue processing the grievance.

Pope D. Johnson, III, of Columbia, for Appellants. Thomas H. Pope, of Newberry, for Respondent.

In this workers' compensation case, the employee settled a liability case against a third party. The employer and carrier contend that the workers' compensation action is barred because the employee destroyed the subrogation rights granted under sections 42-1-550 and 42-1-560. The employee avers that the issue is novel and there is no prejudice to the employer/carrier in regard to the settlement of the third party action in this matter.

Michael David Wood and Patricia O'Neill DeTreville, of Charleston, for Appellant. William J. Clifford, of North Charleston, for Respondent.

In this domestic relations action, the Appellant posits several issues on appeal: (1) Did the Family Court err in construing the parties' agreement on a reservation of alimony? (2) Did the Family Court err in awarding alimony to the Respondent? (3) Did the Family Court properly hold Appellant/Husband in contempt? (4)Did the Family Court err in requiring the Appellant to pay additional sums to Respondent as a result of the refinancing of the former marital home? (5) Did the Family Court err in requiring Appellant to pay attorney's fees and expenses for the Respondent, and in setting the amount of such fees and expenses required of Appellant at $28,037.45? (6) Did the Family Court err in including in its Order references to sidebar conferences which are not part of the record in this case?

C. Mitchell Brown, of Columbia; Richard A. Farrier, Jr., Walter T. Cox, III, and Andrea K. St. Amand, of Charleston; for Appellants. Stephen E. Carter, of Hilton Head Island, for Respondents.

This appeal involves the interpretation of an option to purchase real estate contained in an Asset Acquisition Agreement. Alexander's Land Co. (Alexander's) entered into an Agreement to purchase certain assets of an ongoing restaurant operation owned by M&M&K (MMK). Within the terms of the Agreement was an option to purchase the land and building owned by IFBIFB (IFB). Alexander's and MMK completed the asset purchase and sale but IFB refused to sell the real estate, claiming Alexander's failed to properly exercise the option. The trial court found that Alexander's had not exercised the option. Alexander's appeals seeking specific performance and damages for the delay.

Michael Warner Battle, of Conway, and Michael B.T. Wilkes and D. Alan Lazenby, of Spartanburg, for Appellant Mid-South Management Company Inc. Robert E. Stepp and Amy Hills, of Columbia, for Respondents.

Mid-South appeals the master-in-equity's refusal to pierce the corporate veil of Sherwood, arguing: (1) Sherwood was a mere instrumentality or alter ego of the parent corporations; (2) the elements for piercing the veil were met; and (3) the parent corporations were liable under an amalgamation of interests theory.

Mark Andrew Nappier, of Myrtle Beach, and James B. Richardson, Jr., of Columbia, for Appellant. Dominic A. Starr, of Myrtle Beach, for Respondent Inlet Harbour.

SCDPRT claims the circuit court erred in failing to find an easement for ingress and egress over Inlet Harbour Drive included residential purposes.

Irby E. Walker, Jr., of Conway, for Appellant. Joseph F. Singleton, of Conway, for Respondent.

James Alfred Goff appeals: (1) the family court's denial of his request to declare the alimony portion of the final order and divorce decree null and void; and (2) the family court's award of fourteen thousand dollars of attorney's fees and costs to Drenetha Dale Goff.

Eric G. Fosmire and Andrew N. Cole, of Collins & Lacy, of Columbia, for Appellants. Saul Gliserman, of Charleston, for Respondent Lawrence Ridgeway. William D. Britt, of Columbia, for Respondents Stella Roland, Steven Roland, et al.

Respondents sued Appellants alleging that the defective construction of their condominiums resulted in water intrusion and the growth of toxic mold in their units, rendering them uninhabitable. The trial court granted Respondents' motion for summary judgment as to liability. On appeal, Appellants argue summary judgment was improper because (1) there are issues of material fact yet to be resolved regarding liability; and (2) the area allegedly impacted by mold is in the common area, which Respondents do not own.

D. Malloy McEachin, Jr., of Florence, for Appellant. Charles Craig Young, of Florence, for Respondents.

Appellant claims the lower court erred in finding a prescriptive easement over St. Luke’s Cemetery, and that the lower court erred in finding that Blue Stone Drive has been a public road since 1973.

Charles E. Carpenter, Jr. and Carmen V. Ganjehsani, of Columbia, and Michael S. Hopewell, of Florence, for Appellant-Respondent. Susan Corner Rosen, of Charleston; Daniel Francis Blanchard, III, of Charleston; and Peter Fredrick Asmer, Jr., of Charlotte, NC, for Respondents-Appellants.

Appellant/Respondent claims the entry of default entered against them was based upon invalid service and should have been set aside for good cause. Respondents/Appellants claim the master-in-equity erred in refusing to grant prejudgment interest, and the circuit court erred by invalidating the service of the summons and complaint that occurred on August 28, 2001, and by ruling the Defendant's motion complied with SCRCP 6(d) and 7(b)(1).

Stephen G. Morrison and Paul T. Collins, of Columbia, for Appellant. Arthur E. Justice, Jr., J. Jakob Kennedy, of Florence, and R. Hawthorne Barrett, of Columbia, for Respondent.

In an appeal from a foreclosure action with a counterclaim of negligence and breach of contract, Appellant claims the trial court erred in failing to grant a new trial pursuant to the thirteenth juror doctrine, or in the alternative, a new trial nisi additur, and that the trial court erred in denying the Appellant’s motion to amend its complaint to assert a cause of action for civil conspiracy.