Court of Appeals Published Opinions -
April 2002
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.
4-1-2002 - Opinions
3470 - Etheredge v. Monsanto Company
The efficacy of section 42-15-20 (timely notice of injury to employer by employee) is the gravament of this case.
The offenses of grand larceny and criminal conspiracy are analyzed under the circumstantial evidence rule. The doctrine of the
This case discusses the construction of an automobile insurance policy with an invalid clause limiting the amount of stackable UIM coverage.
This opinion discusses the treatment of in-laws under the resulting trust presumptions.
4-8-2002 - Opinions
This is an action to construe a will and determine the ownership of shares of stock resulting from stock splits.
Crawley asserts several trial errors, including that her confession should have been suppressed because the police did not inform her of the subject of the interrogation and because she was undergoing withdrawal from several substances.
4-15-2002 - Opinions
Appeal from convictions for lewd act with a minor and three counts of assault and battery, arguing trial court erred in consolidating indictments for trial and in limiting the Defendant's presentation of his defense.
3477 - Adkins v. Georgia-Pacific
This is an appeal from the circuit court's order reversing the workers' compensation commission's award of future medical costs for recurring effects of an admitted injury.
This case construes and applies the definition of "household member" as contained in the Criminal Domestic Violence Statute.
This is an action challenging DHEC's interpretation of its aquaculture permitting regulations.
4-22-2002 - Opinions
Addresses the question of subject matter jurisdiction in a case involving paternity.
This case discusses which materials must be disclosed to criminal defendants under S.C.Code Ann. ยง 56-5-2950 (Supp. 2001).
This criminal case discusses the admissibility of an in-court identification, consent to having blood drawn, and mandatory credit for time served.
4-29-2002 - Opinions
The Court of Appeals held: (1) South Carolina law does not allow
3484 - Builder Mart v. First Union
Addresses both general and specific personal jurisdiction in a civil action.
Interpretation of insurance policy: Family member exclusion provision and out-of-state coverage