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.

6029 - Mark Green v. Wayne B. Bauerle

This is the second round of appeals from the circuit court's order allocating the setoffs to which the non settling defendants are entitled in this tragic case. Following the supreme court's reversal and remand of the circuit court's 80/20 allocation, Wayne B. Bauerle, M.D. and Wayne B. Bauerle, M.D., P.C. (collectively, Dr. Bauerle) have now appealed the circuit court's order equally allocating a prior settlement to set off the jury verdicts returned for Ann and Randall "Randy" Green (the Greens). Dr. Bauerle argues the circuit court erred in (1) finding the Greens intended that their settlement with Grand Strand Regional Medical Center (Grand Strand) be allocated equally between them; (2) calculating Mrs. Green's loss of consortium damages in a manner that exceeded the jury's verdict in order to find the Greens' proposed allocation did not result in a double recovery; (3) failing to treat the verdicts and settlement proceeds as marital or joint property; and (4) failing to apply controlling precedent. We affirm.

10-18-2023 - Opinions

5999 - Jerome Campbell v. State

In this post-conviction relief (PCR) action, Petitioner Jerome Campbell (Campbell) seeks review of an order dismissing his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Campbell argues that the PCR court erred in finding that Campbell's trial counsel was not ineffective in failing to object to the trial court's mutual combat charge. We affirm.

6021 - Stewart Buchanan v. SCDPPPS

Stewart Buchanan appeals the order of the Administrative Law Court (ALC), which affirmed the denial of parole by the Parole Board of the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services (the Board), arguing (1) the Board's procedures violated his right to due process and (2) his forty-seven years of incarceration for a crime he committed as a juvenile constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. We affirm.

10-25-2023 - Opinions

6030 - James L. Carrier v. State

In this post-conviction relief (PCR) action, Petitioner, the State of South Carolina (the State), seeks review of an order granting Respondent James L. Carrier's PCR application on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel. The State argues the PCR court erred in finding Carrier's trial counsel was ineffective in failing to present evidence to support a motion to quash Carrier's indictment. We reverse.