Joanna Katherine Delany, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Megan Harrigan Jameson, and Joshua Abraham Edwards, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

In this action for post-conviction relief (PCR), Wilton Q. Greene (Petitioner) argues the PCR court erred in: (1) finding trial counsel provided effective assistance of counsel; and (2) finding overwhelming evidence of guilt precluded Petitioner from showing prejudice.

Amy Lynn Neuschafer, of Collins & Lacy, PC, of Murrells Inlet, for Appellant. Gene McCain Connell, Jr., of Kelaher Connell & Connor, PC, of Surfside Beach; and Julian Zeno Hanna, of Julian Z. Hanna & Assoc., PA, of Pawleys Island, both for Respondent.

On appeal in this negligence action, the City of Myrtle Beach argues the circuit court erred in granting Richard Ciampanella's motion for a new trial when he failed to present evidence of the standard of care or a breach of the standard of care.

Susan Barber Hackett, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and William M. Blitch, Jr., both of Columbia, for Respondent.

Philip Guderyon (Appellant) appeals his conviction for assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature (ABHAN) arguing the circuit court erred in: (1) failing to direct a verdict of acquittal; (2) instructing the jury that in order for self-defense to apply, Appellant must have been in fear of great bodily injury or death; and (3) instructing the jury that the State had to prove Appellant intended to injure another person with no regard to whether he intended the level of injury that occurred.

Joanna Katherine Delany, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

In this appeal from a petition for post conviction relief (PCR), Joshua Reed asserts the PCR court erred in finding his trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to object or move for a mistrial or severance when Reed's co-defendant injected facts not in evidence during his closing statement.

Deborah Kay Lewis, of Charleston, for Appellant. Brett Lamb Stevens, of Stevens Law, LLC, of Columbia, for Respondent.

Courtney Celeste Atkinson and Hannah Rogers Metcalfe, both of Metcalfe & Atkinson, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant. Kenneth Norman Shaw, of Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, PA, of Greenville, for Respondents.

In this civil action arising from Jane Doe's visit to Oconee Memorial Hospital seeking a sexual assault forensic examination, Doe appeals the circuit court's order dismissing her claims for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress against Oconee Memorial Hospital and Greenville Health System pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP.

Courtney Celeste Atkinson and Hannah Rogers Metcalfe, both of Metcalfe & Atkinson, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant. Kenneth Norman Shaw, of Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, PA, of Greenville, for Respondents.

In this civil action arising from Jane Doe's visit to Oconee Memorial Hospital seeking a sexual assault forensic examination, Doe appeals the circuit court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the respondents. On appeal, Doe argues she was not given a full and fair opportunity to complete discovery and the circuit court erred by finding her claims were time-barred.

Courtney Celeste Atkinson and Hannah Rogers Metcalfe, both of Metcalfe & Atkinson, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant. Kenneth Norman Shaw, of Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, PA, of Greenville, for Respondents.

In this civil action arising from Jane Doe's visit to Oconee Memorial Hospital seeking a sexual assault forensic examination, Doe appeals the circuit court's order granting the respondents' motion to dismiss, arguing the circuit court erred by finding her claims were barred by the statute of limitations.

Melinda Inman Butler, of The Butler Law Firm, of Union, for Appellant. Kenneth Philip Shabel, of Kennedy & Brannon, P.A.; and Rachel Ilene Brough, of Cate & Brough, P.A., both of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

William Tobias (Father) appeals the family court order granting Elena Glinyanay (Mother) sole custody of the parties' two daughters, suspending Father's visitation rights, ordering Father to undergo a psychological evaluation and complete any counseling or therapy recommended, ordering Father's counselor or therapist and daughters' counselor to work together to determine if and when visitation with Father would be appropriate, and ordering Father to pay $12,500 of Mother's attorney's fees and $5,274.69 in guardian ad litem (GAL) fees. On appeal, Father argues the family court erred in (1) allowing his daughters' statements into evidence when they did not testify at trial, especially since the family court did not allow Father to call his seventeen-year-old daughter as a witness; (2) terminating his visitation rights; (3) admitting the daughters' counselor's written report into evidence; (4) allowing daughters' counselor to determine when and if Father could have visitation; and (5) ordering Father to pay Mother's attorney's fees and his portion of the GAL fees.

Dwight Christopher Moore, of Moore Law Firm, LLC, of Sumter, for Appellant. William E. Jenkinson, III, of Jenkinson, Kellahan, Thompson & Reynolds, PA, and William Evan Reynolds, both of Kingstree, for Respondents.

Shawonder Scott appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Norma L. Cyrus in her capacity as Tax Collector for Williamsburg County and Williamsburg County (collectively, Respondents). Scott contends that Respondents violated section 12-51-40 of the South Carolina Code (2014 & Supp. 2021) by not providing her with notice of delinquent taxes, the sale of the property, or an opportunity to redeem the property she claims she was renting to own. Scott asserts the trial court erred by determining Respondents did not owe Scott any duty because she was not the defaulting taxpayer of record, the owner of record, or the grantee of record.

Olandio Workman appeals his conviction for criminal domestic violence of a high and aggravated nature (CDVHAN), arguing the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to instruct the jury on the definition of second-degree criminal domestic violence (CDV) and moderate bodily injury as part of its first-degree CDV jury instruction.

Thomas R. Goldstein, of Belk Cobb Infinger & Goldstein, PA, of Charleston, for Appellants. Matthew Tillman, of Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, of Charleston, for Respondent.

Wilbert Roller, Jr. and Betty V. Roller appeal the master-in-equity's foreclosure on their 22-acre property arguing (1) the master-in-equity lacked jurisdiction; (2) the master-in-equity erred in denying their motion for involuntary nonsuit; (3) the disparity between the sales price of the property and the property's true value was so large that the transaction was inequitable; and (4) the master-in-equity erred in denying their motion requiring the lender to produce an appraisal of the property they had performed.

Adam Sinclair Ruffin, of Columbia, for Appellant. Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Mark Reynolds Farthing, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

Victoria Lorraine Sanchez appeals her convictions for trafficking more than twenty-eight grams of heroin and unlawful conduct towards a child, arguing the trial court erred in (1) denying her motion to suppress the drugs found in her vehicle, (2) denying her motion for directed verdicts, and (3) refusing to charge the circumstantial evidence jury charge she requested.

Matthew Terry Richardson and James Edward Cox, Jr., both of Wyche Law Firm, of Columbia; and Whitney Boykin Harrison, of McGowan Hood & Felder, LLC, of Columbia, all for Appellant. Rodney F. Pillsbury, of Pillsbury Law Firm, LLC, of Greenville, for Respondent.

Mary Amanda Harrelson Shuler, of Whetstone Perkins & Fulda, LLC, of Kingstree, for Appellant. Marian Dawn Nettles, of Nettles Turbeville & Reddeck, of Lake City, and Everett Guy Ballenger, of Barth, Ballenger & Lewis, LLP, of Florence, both for Respondent.

In this change of custody action, Appellant Stacie N. Powell n/k/a Stacie N. Lovett (Mother) seeks review of the family court's order awarding Respondent Dustin G. Powell (Father) custody of their two minor children. Mother argues that the family court erred by finding a substantial change in circumstances affecting the children's welfare because there was no negative change in the children's performance in school and Father did not increase the time he spent with the children despite a change in his work schedule allowing him more flexibility. Mother also argues that the family court erred by concluding that a change in custody was in the children's best interests because the court's findings were not supported by the evidence and the court gave undue weight to the report of the guardian ad litem.