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.
6-4-2014 - Opinions
The Court affirms the circuit court's order holding that the City of Georgetown's denial of multiple franchise applications by Horry Telephone Cooperative Inc. was not a violation of the South Carolina Competitive Cable Services Act, S.C. Code Ann. §§ 58-12-5 et seq. (Supp. 2013).
The Court affirmed the circuit court's dismissal of Appellant's legal malpractice case and the award of sanctions against Appellant, holding: (1) Appellant's claims against Respondents Becker and Grier were barred by the statute of limitations; (2) Appellant's legal malpractice claim against Respondents failed because she did not establish the standard of care and Respondent's deviation from that standard through expert testimony; (3) the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant a continuance; and (4) sanctions against Appellant were warranted.
In this direct appeal, the Court affirms the trial court's finding that the ordinance is valid.6-11-2014 - Opinions
In this direct appeal, the Court reverses the circuit court's denial of Appellants' claim for equitable indemnification of attorney's fees.
The Court reverses the court of appeals and finds the trial court properly denied the directed verdict motion of Ford Motor Co. The case is remanded to the court of appeals to address the remaining issues.6-18-2014 - Opinions
This is an opinion in which the Court definitely suspends a lawyer.
In a case of first impression, we hold the Saluda County Council's amendment of a previously posted agenda during its regularly scheduled meeting did not violate section 30-4-80, the notice provision in South Carolina's Freedom of Information Act.
The Court reverses the circuit court's decision denying a nursing home's motion to compel arbitration, overruling Timms v. Greene, 310 S.C. 469, 427 S.E.2d 642 (1993), in its entirety and finding that: (1) the Federal Arbitration Act applies to the arbitration agreement; (2) the named arbitral forum was not integral to the agreement; and (3) the nursing home did not waive its right to compel arbitration by participating in a pre-suit mediation in accordance with S.C. Code Ann. § 15-79-125 (Supp. 2012).
The Court reverses and remands, finding that the circuit court improperly granted the State's motion pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), after Appellant offered a race-neutral explanation for striking a particular juror.6-25-2014 - Opinions
In answering certified questions from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, this Court holds the definition of "actual charges" contained within section 38-71-242 of the South Carolina Code does not apply to supplemental insurance contracts executed prior to the statute's effective date.