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.
8-1-2005 - Opinions
The Court affirmed the circuit court's order granting the school district summary judgment in this breach of employment contract case brought by a teacher hired pursuant to an at-will contract.8-8-2005 - Opinions
This petition for original jurisdiction involves the following issues: (1) What is the scope of authority of the Administrative Law Court to review interlocutory orders in physician disciplinary proceedings; and (2) Is the Administrative Law Court required to issue an order setting forth specific findings of fact regarding closure of physician disciplinary proceedings.8-8-2005 - Orders
ORDER - In the Matter of Scott L. Hood
ORDER - In the Matter of Harry E. Bodiford
8-15-2005 - Opinions
The Court affirmed the court of appeals’ decision dismissing the notice of appeal as untimely.
The Court held that probate courts have jurisdiction to determine paternity for the purpose of determining heirs. The Court also held that the divorce action in this case constituted a prior, final adjudication of paternity.
The Court reversed the PCR court’s ruling and reinstated Respondent’s convictions and sentence.
This case determines whether there is a right to a jury trial in an inverse condemnation case.
This opinion addresses the joinder of charges and evidentiary issues in a case involving Munchausen Sydrome by Proxy.
This is a disciplinary opinion in which the Court publicly reprimanded a magistrate.
This case involves the issue of whether the remedy of partition by allotment is applicable under the given facts.8-15-2005 - Orders
ORDER - In the Matter of John A. Pincelli
This is an order placing an attorney on interim suspension.8-22-2005 - Opinions
The Court affirmed in result, holding that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment because Appellants failed to establish sufficient evidence that Respondents caused or contributed to Appellants’ injuries.
The Court affirmed the court of appeals’ decision holding that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to Anderson, is sufficient to submit the question of actual malice to a jury.
In this matter, a federal district court judge certified four questions regarding an insurer's duty to make a meaningful offer of underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage to its commercial insured, which in this instance is a corporation. The Supreme Court held that (1) the policy at issue is an "exempt commercial policy" as that term is defined in S.C. Code Ann. 38-1-20(40); (2) automobile insurers in South Carolina are required to make a meaningful offer of optional UIM coverage when selling an exempt commercial policy because the Legislature has not established an exception for such policies; (3) automobile insurers are required to make a meaningful offer of optional UIM coverage when selling a commercial "fronting policy" because it is an insurance policy and the Legislature has not established an exception for such policies; and (4) an automobile insurer must comply with the requirements set forth in the Wannamaker decision when selling a commerical fronting policy.8-29-2005 - Opinions
This is an attorney disciplinary opinion in which the Court imposed a ninety day definite suspension.
This is an attorney disciplinary opinion in which the Court issued a definite suspension of two years
This case involves the issue of whether a social host can be found liable for the injuries sustained by a minor guest who has been provided alcohol by the social host.
The Court agreed with the Court of Appeals that a social host who knowingly and intentionally serves alcohol to a person aged eighteen to twenty may be liable to a third party injured by the minor in an alcohol-related accident.8-29-2005 - Orders
ORDER - In the Matter of Jeffrey T. Spell
This is an order placing an attorney on interim suspension.ORDER - In the Matter of James Archie Patrick, III
This is an order placing an attorney on interim suspension.