Supreme Court Seal
Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
Judicial Department
Court of Appeals Published Opinions - September 2004

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.

9-7-2004 - Opinions

3861 - Grant v. Grant

The majority concludes a textile parts salesman's injuries, incurred when he was struck by a vehicle while attempting to remove an obstacle from a public road, did not arise out of and in the course of his employment.

3862 - Kizer v. Kinard

Verlette Kizer brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment under an UIM policy issued to her by Horace Mann Insurance Company. The circuit court found Kizer could receive compensation for an amount up to the limits of the UIM policy subject to a setoff of $25,000. This court affirms the circuit court's ruling.

3863 - Burgess v. Nationwide Insurance

In this automobile insurance case, the trial court granted declaratory relief and found Burgess was entitled to UIM coverage on a vehicle carrying basic liability coverage but no UIM coverage. This court affirmed as modified.

3864 - State v. Weaver

Appellant appeals his convictions for murder and possession of a weapon during the commission of a crime of violence. Appellant contends the trial court erred in: (1) admitting evidence obtained pursuant to a procedurally defective warrant; (2) admitting hearsay testimony; and (3) declining to grant a mistrial based on inappropriate prosecutorial comment on Appellant's decision not to testify during the trial.

9-20-2004 - Opinions

3865 - DuRant v. SCDHEC

DuRant filed an administrative appeal from the denial of his dock permit by the S.C.D.H.E.C's office of OCRM. The ALJ and the circuit court both affirmed the denial of his permit. On appeal, DuRant argues the circuit court erred in: (1) finding the area was properly declared a geographic area of particular concern; and (2) finding DuRant's rights to due process and equal protection had not been violated. We affirm.

9-27-2004 - Opinions

3866 - State v. Dunbar

Dunbar was convicted of trafficking in cocaine (100-200 grams), trafficking in cocaine (200-400 grams), and trafficking in crack cocaine (200-400 grams). The crack cocaine found in the warrantless search of the vehicle Dunbar was in was upheld by this court, but the court reversed the trial court's refusal to suppress the evidence found pursuant to the search warrant because it failed to comply with the statute. The supreme court remanded the search warrant issue, and instructed this court to address only the constitutional concerns. Upon remand, we again reverse the trial court's refusal to suppress the evidence obtained pursuant to the search warrant because the warrant was not supported by probable cause where it was not made pursuant to oath or affirmation and the magistrate was not neutral and detached. We reverse the convictions pursuant to the search warrant and remand for a new trial.

3867 - Campbell v. Carr

In this equity case, Appellants appeal the granting of specific performance by the Master-in-Equity. On Appeal, the court reviews the issue of an order granting specific performance of a contract under circumstances involving allegations of a grossly inadequate consideration combined with weakness of mind on the part of the seller.

3868 - B & B Liquors, Inc. v. O'Neil

In this civil action, the Court reviews the granting of summary judgment in favor of the Respondent. Issues analyzed are: (1) the form of the Order granting summary judgment; and (2) the efficacy of a written contract as juxtaposed to claims of fraud, misrepresentations, and unilateral or mutual mistakes. Additionally, the Court addresses the application of the Dead Man's Statute and whether the written contract contains a non-reliance or a merger and integration clause.

3869 - Burns v. Universal Health Services

In this civil action, a jury verdict was rendered in favor of Katherine Burns (Appellant) against Universal Health Services, Inc. (Respondent) in the sum of Thirty-Two Thousand ($32,000.00) Dollars. The Circuit Court granted respondent's motion for a judgment non obstante veredicto. Appellant was employed for sixteen (16) years as a registered nurse by Aiken Regional Hospital, Respondent's predecessor. After Appellant's termination, she instituted an action for damages based on an employee manual addressing policy procedures related to discipline and termination. The issues on appeal involve the efficacy of the employee manual as juxtaposed to the at-will employment doctrine.

3870 - Emery v. Smith

In this Family Court case, the Court reviews an award granting Respondent a retroactive interest in Appellant's military retirement. Appellant poses a number of defenses: (1) laches; (2) unclean hands; (3) unreasonable delay; and (4) financial hardship and prejudice.