William B. Regan, Frances I. Cantwell, both of Regan & Cantwell, Susan Jeanne Herdina, and Timothy A. Domin, of Clawson & Staubes, LLC, all of Charleston, for Appellants-Respondents. Trent M. Kernodle, David A. Root, Christine C. Varnado and Robert B. Varnado, all of Kernodle, Taylor and Root, of Charleston, for Respondent-Appellant. Samuel W. Howell, IV, of Howell and Linkous, of Charleston, for Respondents.

Hugh M. Claytor and Heather Goetz Ruth, both of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC, of Greenville, for Appellants. M. Dawes Cooke, Jr. and P. Gunnar Nistad, both of Barnwell Whaley Patterson & Helms, LLC, of Charleston, for Respondent.

This case was certified to this Court by the Court of Appeals. The issue on appeal is whether the statute of limitations for a legal malpractice claim begins to run on the date of the jury verdict, or upon the date of the conclusion of the appeal.

Charles E. Carpenter, Jr. and S. Elizabeth Brosnan, both of Richardson, Plowden, Carpenter & Robinson, PA, of Columbia; and Stephen Paul Bucher, of North Charleston, for Petitioners. Ronnie Alan Sabb, of Kingstree, Richard G. Wern, of N. Charleston and Ladson Fishburne Howell, Jr., of Howell & Christmas, of N. Charleston, for Respondent.

In this case involving a pedestrian-automobile accident, the appellant argues, among other things, that the Court of Appeals erred in changing the common law standard of care from reasonable care to best choice care. Appellant also argues the court erred in its findings on proximate causation and comparative negligence.

Charles Franklin Thompson, Jr., of Malone & Thompson, of Columbia, for Petitioner. J. Charles Ormond, Jr., of Holler, Dennis, Corbett, Ormond, & Garner, of Columbia, for Respondent.

This is a wrongful-discharge case before the Court on writ of certiorari. The Court of Appeals reversed the grant of summary judgment for the employer, finding a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Respondent was an at-will employee.

Acting Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for petitioner. Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh and Senior Assistant Attorney General Norman Mark Rapoport, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for respondent.

This case involves a question of whether petitioner is entitled to a new trial because of juror misconduct.

Robert Daniel Dodson, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Christopher M. Kelly, of Gallivan, White & Boyd, PA, of Greenville, for Respondent.

This case involves the issues of whether the Court of Appeals erred by finding David Price’s conduct was not committed in the scope of his employment and whether the Court of Appeals erred by finding petitioner did not properly preserve the argument that David was negligent for failing to secure a vehicle.

Peter L. Fuge and Jason P. Peavy, both of Law Offices of Peter L. Fuge, P.A. and H. Fred Kuhn, Jr., of Moss, Kuhn & Fleming, P.A., all of Beaufort, for Appellant. William Randall Phipps, of Phipps & Geis, of Hilton Head Island, for Respondent. Frederick M. Corley, of Beaufort, for Guardian Ad Litem.

This is a domestic action involving child custody. The issue is whether the family court abused his discretion in awarding custody to the mother.

Andrew F. Lindemann, of Davidson Morrison & Lindemann and Julius W. McKay, II, of McKay Cauthen Settana Martin & Addison, P.A., both of Columbia, for Petitioner. J. Marvin Mullis, Jr., of Columbia, for Respondent.

In this medical malpractice case, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the defendant physician. The Court of Appeals reversed and granted the plaintiff a new trial. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to consider whether the Court of Appeals erred in (1) denying the physician's motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely, (2) reversing the jury's verdict based on the trial court's exclusion of testimony regarding the qualifications of the plaintiff's expert witness, and (3) reversing the jury's verdict based on the trial court's refusal to allow the plaintiff to use a medical treatise to cross-examine the defendant physician.

W. Allen Nickles, III, Carl L. Solomon and Dona L. Guffey, all of Gergel, Nickles & Solomon, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Andrea E. White, Charles J. Boykin, Karen E. Lear, all of Duff, White & Boykin, of Columbia, for Respondent.

The Court granted certiorari to consider a decision of the Court of Appeals reinstating the School District's decision to terminate Shell's teaching contract.

Jack B. Swerling and Richard A. Harpootlian, both of Columbia, for Appellant. Joel W. Collins, Jr. and Joseph S. McCue, both of Collins & Lacy, of Columbia, for Respondent, Gooding & Gooding, P.A. Amanda G. Steinmeyer and Daniel A. Speights, both of Speights & Runyan, of Hampton, for Respondent, Elizabeth K. Gooding.

This is a legal malpractice action. The issues before this Court involve whether the circuit court had subject matter jurisdiction to grant summary judgment and cite the Appellant for contempt of court.

Richard Mark Gergel and W. Allen Nickles, III, both of Gergel, Nickles & Solomon, PA, of Columbia, for Petitioners/Defendants, SC Retirement System and SC Budget and Control. Edwin E. Evans, of Columbia, for Petitioner/Defendant, SC Budget and Control Board. Stephen Raymond Van Camp and R. Kent Porth, of Nexsen Pruet Adams Kleemeier, LLC, both of Columbia, for Petitioner/Defendant, SC Retirement System. Michael Eugene Spears, of Spartanburg, Gedney M. Howe, III, of Charleston and A. Camden Lewis, of Lewis, Babcock & Hawkins, of Columbia, for Respondents/Plaintiffs.

This is an original jurisdiction case involving § 9-1-10(4) which determines how an employee's annual leave is used in the calculation of state retirement benefits."

George R. Burnett, of South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, of Columbia, for Appellant. Patricia Logan Harrison, of Columbia, for Respondents.

This is a rehearing on the Court’s decision in Ex Parte: South Carolina Dep’t of Health and Human Services, Appellant, In re State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., Plaintiff v. Justin Jackson, a minor under the age of (14) years et al., Respondents, Op. No. 25529 (S.C. Sup. Ct. filed August 9, 2004), regarding the issue of whether the trial court erred by placing insurance proceeds into Special Needs Trusts before satisfying Medicaid’s claim to those proceeds.