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.

28227 - The State v. Olandio R. Workman

The Court affirms in part and reverses in part the court of appeals' decision in State v. Workman, 437 S.C. 62, 876 S.E.2d 151 (Ct. App. 2022).

28228 - E.G. and J.J. v. SCDSS

The sole question we address in this appeal is whether the provision in subsection 63-9-780(C) of the South Carolina Code (2010) requiring that "All files and records pertaining to the adoption proceedings in the State Department of Social Services . . . are confidential and must be withheld from inspection except upon court order for good cause shown" insulates those files and records from discovery in a civil action. The answer is "No." Categorically, if any such files or records meet the criteria for civil discovery under Rules 26 to 37 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, then "good cause" exists under section 63-9-780 as to those files or records. We have no concern that civil discovery of the files or records will jeopardize their confidentiality because the circuit or family court can and must preserve that confidentiality through the use of an appropriate protective order under Rule 26(c). We reverse the court of appeals' decision affirming the trial court's refusal to require disclosure of the documents.

28229 - The State v. Gregg Pickrell

We affirm as modified the decision of the court of appeals in State v. Pickrell, 435 S.C. 417, 867 S.E.2d 465 (Ct. App. 2021).

28230 - Justin R. Cone v. State

Justin Ryan Cone was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor. The trial court refused the State's request for a jury instruction that, under section 16-3-657 of the South Carolina Code (2015), the testimony of an alleged victim of criminal sexual conduct need not be corroborated. However, over Cone's objection, the trial court allowed the State to cite and quote the statute during its closing argument. The court of appeals affirmed Cone's conviction, holding the issue of whether the State could argue section 16-3-657 was unpreserved. We granted Cone's petition for a writ of certiorari and now reverse the court of appeals and remand for a new trial.

28231 - In the Matter of Jeffrey Alton Phillips

In this attorney disciplinary matter, the Court accepts the agreement for discipline and imposes a six-month definite suspension.

28232 - In the Matter of Everett Joseph Mercer

In this attorney disciplinary matter, the Court imposes a public reprimand.

28233 - Jolly v. Fisher Controls International, LLC and Crosby Valve, LLC

The primary issues in this case involve a civil trial court's power to grant a motion for a new trial nisi. We find the trial court applied the correct standard for decision in granting the plaintiffs' motion for a new trial nisi additur, acted within its discretion in finding the jury verdict inadequate, and followed the proper procedure by permitting the non-moving party to reject the nisi amount in favor of a new trial. We also find the trial court acted within its discretion in allocating the proceeds of pretrial settlements for the purpose of setoff. We affirm.

28234 - Alvetta L. Massenberg v. Clarendon County Treasurer

Alvetta Massenberg appeals the master-in-equity's refusal to set aside a delinquent tax sale of her real property. She argues the sale was invalid because the statutory notice was not posted in a "conspicuous" place as required by subsection 12-51-40(c) of the South Carolina Code (Supp. 2023). The court of appeals affirmed. Massenberg v. Clarendon Cnty. Treasurer, Op. No. 2022-UP-410 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Nov. 16, 2022). We find the required notice was not posted in a conspicuous place and reverse.