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.
10-7-2002 - Opinions
25532 - Drew v. Waffle House, Inc.
25533 - In the Matter of Richard C. Bell
In this opinion, the Court placed Richard C. Bell on definite suspenion for two years. Respondent failed to keep adequate financial records. He also failed to disclose actual or potential conflicts of interest.
25534 - In the Matter of F. Mikell Harper
In this opinion, the Court definitely suspended F. Mikell Harper for entering into a business transaction with a client without advising the client to seek advice from independent counsel.
Primary issues are whether a person convicted of conspiracy to traffic is properly sentenced for trafficking pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 44-53-370 (e)(2)(e)(2002), and whether an arrest for conspiracy terminates participation in the conspiracy.
Issue is whether a person convicted of conspiracy to traffic is properly sentenced for trafficking pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 44-53-370 (e)(2)(e)(2002).
Issue is whether a person convicted of conspiracy to traffic is properly sentenced for trafficking pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 44-53-370 (e)(2)(e)(2002)
This appeal involves the issue of whether grand larceny is a lesser-included offense of armed robbery.
This case involves the issues of whether grand larceny is a lesser-included offense of armed robbery, whether petitioner's plea to murder was knowingly and voluntarily entered, and whether the plea court lacked subject matter jurisdiction on the murder indictment.
This opinion addresses the applicability of the Fireman's Rule in South Carolina and holds that the Fireman's Rule is not recognized in South Carolina.10-21-2002 - Opinions
Whether an individual convicted of a no parole offense must participate in a Community Supervision Program.10-28-2002 - Opinions
When an attorney reveals a client's intent to use perjured testimony to the trial court and moves to be relieved as counsel, does the trial court’s denial of the motion to be relieved constitute an abuse of discretion?
Court of Appeals certiorari. Issue is whether the State timely moved to set aside an erroneously entered conviction for Driving Under the Influence.
25544 - R. L. Jordan Oil Company of North Carolina, Inc. v. Boardman Petroleum, Inc.
This certified question discusses the meaning of the phrase "meet competition" in § 39-5-325(A) of the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act regarding the retail sale of gasoline.
25545 - The Housing Authority of the City of Charleston v. Key
This case discusses the unauthorized practice of law.
25546 - In the Matter of Jerry W. Craig
Opinion publicly reprimanding attorney for failing render competent representation, failing to respond to clients in a timely fashion, misrepresenting matters to a client, failing to respond to ODC's inquiries, and failing to pay state and federal employer withholding tax.
25547 - In the Matter of Shedrick Jolly, III
In this opinion, the Court disbarred A. Shedrick Jolly, III. On numerous occassions, Jolly misappropriated and converted client funds from his trust account for his personal use.
25548 - In the Matter of James G. Longtin
This opinion suspends James G. Longtin for thirty days for failing to take action on behalf of clients, failing to communicate with clients, and failing to cooperate with Disciplinary Counsel.
25549 - In the Matter of Matthew Edward Davis
Opinion suspending attorney for 60 days for failing act with reasonable diligence when representing a client, willfully violating on order of the Supreme Court and failing to appear pursuant to an subpoena issued by Disciplinary Counsel.
25550 - In the Matter of James A. Franklin, Jr.
This opinion disbars James A. Franklin, Jr. based on his conviction for money laundering.
This is a post-conviction relief action. Petitioner contends his attorney was ineffective for failing to object to the Allen charge.