Court of Appeals Published Opinions -
June 2010
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.
6-1-2010 - Opinions
4690 - Carey and Thomas v. Snee Farm
J. Emilie Carey and Henry G. Thomas filed this action against Snee farm Community Foundation and Jackie Walker, seeking injunctive relief based on alleged irregularities in the 2007 election of directors to the Foundation. The trial court granted summary judgement to the Foundation. We vacate and remand.
6-2-2010 - Opinions
In this criminal case, Cameron Lavar Brown appeals his convictions and sentences for voluntary manslaughter and possession of a firearm during the commission of a violent crime. Brown argues the trial court erred by: (1) refusing to permit the jury to view the crime scene; (2) allowing the State to comment on his post-arrest silence; (3) admitting evidence that he smoked marijuana on the day of the shooting; and (4) refusing a motion for mistrial and continuance.
4692 - In The Matter of Manigo
The State commenced an action pursuant to the South Carolina Sexually Violent Predator Act, alleging Bobbie Manigo met the statutory criteria for confinement as a sexually violent predator (SVP). Based on the Act, the State sought Manigo's commitment in a secure facility for long-term care, control, and treatment. The jury found Manigo was a SVP, and the trial court issued an order committing Manigo to the Department of Mental Health for long-term care and treatment. Manigo argues the trial court erroneously: (1) denied his motion for summary judgment; (2) allowed hearsay testimony; and (3) limited the number of witnesses he could call.
In this appeal from the family court, the Court of Appeals held it was proper to require the husband to pay a portion of his wife's premarital medical expenses resulting from the birth of their child, despite the acquisition of the debt prior to their marriage. The Court also found the family court properly imputed additional income to the husband and agreed with the family court's award of attorneys' fees to the wife.
4694 - Sherlock Holmes Pub v. City of Columbia
London I and Rakesh "Rick" Patel appeal an order requiring them to pay attorney's fees and costs to Enterprise Bank of South Carolina pursuant to an indemnity provision in an assignment and assumption of leases.
6-7-2010 - Opinions
4695 - Hargrove v. Carolina Orthopaedic Surgery
This appeal concerns the denial of workers' compensation benefits to Claimant Dorothy Hargrove because of her alleged failure to meet the statutory requirement regarding notice to her employer of her workplace injury and because of her inability to prove her complaints resulted from her accident.
6-9-2010 - Opinions
Kenneth L. Huckabee was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and assault of a high and aggravated nature. He now appeals, arguing the trial court (1) erred in allowing the State’s primary witness to testify on reply following Huckabee's testimony when the witness was under a sequestration order but had been present in the courtroom following her initial testimony during the State’s case-in-chief, and (2) erred in failing to instruct the jury that the sale of crack cocaine was irrelevant to the fault element in determining self-defense. We affirm.
6-14-2010 - Opinions
Danny Brown was charged with trafficking cocaine. Following a jury trial, he was convicted and sentenced to twenty-five years incarceration. He appeals, arguing the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress the drugs seized after his arrest for an open container violation.
6-15-2010 - Opinions
Mark Baker appeals his convictions for committing a lewd act upon a minor, arguing the trial court erred in: (1) refusing to quash the indictment; (2) denying his motion for a continuance; (3) limiting his cross-examination of a witness; and (4) qualifying a witness as an expert in forensic interviewing.
4699 - Manios v. Nelson Mullins
In this legal malpractice case, Louis Manios and Jimmy Rogers, Jr., as partners in M&R Investors, and M&R Investors (collectively, M&R Investors), argue the trial court erred in: (1) denying M&R Investors' motion for new trial nisi additur; (2) granting a directed verdict on the issue of damages because future profits were foreseeable in this case; (3) denying M&R Investors' motion for directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the issue of legal malpractice; and (4) denying M&R Investors' motion for a new trial absolute on the issue of damages. In its cross appeal, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP, and David Hodge (collectively, Nelson Mullins), argue the trial court erred in denying: (1) Nelson Mullins' motion for summary judgment; (2) Nelson Mullins' pre-trial motion and subsequent motion to strike with respect to M&R Investors' alleged damages; (3) Nelson Mullins' motion for a directed verdict; and (4) Nelson Mullins' Rule 50(b) motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
6-16-2010 - Opinions
Timothy Wallace and several of his family members (the Wallaces) filed this action against Lynn Day, seeking damages for breach of a contract to purchase a condominium unit in the Camelot by the Sea Resort in Myrtle Beach. The master-in-equity granted the Wallaces' summary judgment motion, and Day appeals the master's order. We reverse in part and vacate in part the master's order and remand for a full trial on the merits.
6-22-2010 - Opinions
Appellant Linda Rouvet (Wife) appeals the denial of her Rule 60(b), SCRCP motion for relief from judgment. Prior to the issuance of the judgment, Wife’s attorney was suspended from the practice of law and Wife was evaluated for competency. We reverse and remand.
6-29-2010 - Opinions
Frank Peterson alleges the circuit court erred in granting Charles and Tiffany Porters' motion for summary judgment. Specifically, Peterson maintains the circuit court erred in: (1) finding he was an invitee on the Porters' property; (2) holding the Porters did not breach any duty owed to him; (3) failing to include in its order those facts that the court found relevant, determinative of the issues, and undisputed, sufficient to provide notice as to the rationale applied in granting summary judgment; and (4) failing to address evidence that he had an employer-employee relationship with the Porters.
6-30-2010 - Opinions
4703 - Morris v. Tidewater Land & Timber
This action for an accounting arises out of the 2003 dissolution of Tidewater Land and Timber, Inc. (Tidewater), a corporation in which Leon E. Fonvielle, II (Chuck), William Robert Morris (Robert), and William C. Morris, Jr. (William) were the equal and sole shareholders. On appeal, Tidewater and Chuck challenge the special referee's judgment awarding Robert and William each $90,897.35 and finding against Tidewater and Chuck on their counterclaim. We affirm as modified.
William Randolph Boggs pled guilty to strong-armed robbery. Prior to being sentenced, he requested credit for the time he served in pretrial detention. The plea judge indicated his desire that Boggs not receive credit, and on the sentencing sheet, the plea judge did not check the box that would give Boggs credit for time served. Boggs appeals, arguing he is entitled to receive credit for the time he served pursuant to section 24-13-40 of the South Carolina Code (2007). We agree and modify the sentence to include credit for time served.
4705 - Hudson v. Lancaster Convalescent Center
In this workers' compensation action, Lancaster Convalescent Center (Employer) and Legion Insurance Company (Legion), in liquidation through South Carolina Property and Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association (the Guaranty Association), appeal the circuit court's decision affirming the decision of the Appellate Panel of the Workers' Compensation Commission (Appellate Panel) to award Frances S. Hudson certain workers' compensation benefits. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
In this appeal challenging the enforcement of an Alabama default judgment in South Carolina, Chad Fink asserts the circuit court erred in denying his motion for relief from judgment, arguing the judgment was void for lack of personal jurisdiction.