Note: Beginning in June 2012, opinions will be posted as Adobe PDFs. You can download a free copy of Adobe Reader here.
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.
8-2-2004 - Opinions
Interprets S.C. Code Ann. Section 42-1-415(A) and (B) to allow a higher-tier contractor to obtain reimbursement from the Uninsured Employer's Fund for benefits paid to a subcontractor's injured employee upon a showing the higher-tier contractor obtained evidence of workers' compensation coverage at the time the subcontractor was originally engaged to perform the work.
Appellants appeal various aspects of the trial court's ruling in favor of Respondents in this shareholder derivative action. The Court of Appeals affirmed part of the the trial court's ruling, dismissed the appeal and and remanded the matter for further proceediings.
8-9-2004 - Opinions
This is an appeal from a malpractice action brought by an insured/employee and employer against the insurance agent who marketed the company's health insurance plan. The agent appeals the jury's verdict for the employee and employer, arguing that: (1) the claims were preempted by ERISA; (2) the trial judge erred in admitting certain evidence and testimony; (3) the trial judge erred in failing to grant the agent a new trial; and (4) the trial judge erred in failing to grant the agent's motion for a change of venue. We affirm.
This case affirms the trial court's ruling that the action for intentional infliction of emotional distress is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Workers' Compensation Act, but reverses the holding that a federal court dismissal of a section 1983 action collaterally estops the claimant from asserting certain state law causes of action.
Rogers appeals his covictions for criminal sexual conduct, kidnapping, and strong arm robbery, arguing (1) the testimony from the deaf victim was improperly elicited, (2) his motion for a new trial should have been granted, (3) a foundation was never laid to admit the victim's purse, (4) a chain of custody was not properly established for the victim's purse, and (5) his sentence to life without parole was unconstitutional. We affirm.
Lord Byron Slater appeals his murder conviction, arguing the trial judge erred by not including a self-defense charge. We reverse.
8-16-2004 - Opinions
Husband and Wife were divorced pursuant to an order requiring Husband to pay Wife alimony "for a period of the earlier of seven years or upon the remarraiage of [Wife]." The order also incorporated the parties' agreement that modification could not be made "except by mutual consent and agreement of the parties in writing." After paying alimony for several years, Husband initiated an action seeking termination of his alimony based on the cohabitation of Wife and her boyfriend. The family court denied Husband's request, and this appeal followed.
This case arises from numerous voided tax sales of real property in Beaufort County. After the sales were voided, the County returned the purchase prices to the successful bidders but refused to return the interest the money had earned. The bidders sued and, under a theory of restitution, were awarded an amount equal to the interest earned by Beaufort County during the time it held the bidders' money. The County appeals.
Charlotte O'Braitis brought an action seeking the partition of real property and an accounting for rents and profits against her sister, Catheryne O'Braitis, alleging Catheryne ousted her from a piece of property the two parties own. Charlotte appeals the trial court's order granting the partition but denying her request for expenses and rents caused by Catheryne's alleged ouster.
Superior and National filed their late answer and counterclaim days before Stark Truss's motion for entry of default judgment was received and acted upon by the trial court. Superior and National appeal from the trial court's denial of their motions to set aside entry of default, for relief from default judgment, and to reinstate their counterclaims. We affirm the entry of default, affirm the dismissal of the compulsory counterclaims, and reverse the refusal to set aside the default judgment.
8-23-2004 - Opinions
Appellant appeals his convictions for four counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC) with a minor and one count of lewd act upon a child. Appellant asserts the State violated his Fifth Amendment guarantee of due process of law through excessive pre-indictment delay.