Supreme Court Seal
Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
Judicial Department
Supreme Court Published Opinions - March 2019

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.

3-6-2019 - Opinions

27866 - Osbey v. State

We reverse the denial of Osbey's PCR claim because the record does not reflect a valid waiver of Osbey's right to counsel.

3-11-2019 - Opinions

27806 - Sentry Select Insurance v. Maybank Law Firm

On a certified question from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, we find an insurer may maintain a direct malpractice action against counsel hired to represent its insured, under the limitations we will describe in the opinion.

3-13-2019 - Opinions

27867 - Skydive v. Horry County

In this case the Court clarifies that when a trial court dismisses a complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, the trial court should allow the plaintiff leave to amend the complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a) before filing the final order of dismissal.

3-20-2019 - Opinions

27868 - Wright v. PRG Real Estate Management

Denise Wright sued Respondents for negligence, alleging Respondents voluntarily undertook a duty to provide security to residents of her apartment complex and breached this duty, thereby causing her damages. The circuit court granted summary judgment to Respondents, and a divided court of appeals affirmed. The Court reverses the court of appeals and remands the matter to the circuit court for trial.

27869 - Shaw v. Psychemedics Corporation

The Court certified the following question from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina: Under South Carolina law, does a drug testing laboratory that has a contract with an employer to conduct and evaluate drug tests owe a duty of care to the employees who are subject to the testing so as to give rise to a cause of action for negligence for failure to properly and accurately perform the test and report the results? The Court answers this question in the affirmative.

27870 - Sweeney v. Sweeney

In this marital litigation, we clarify that in determining alimony, family courts should consider the effect of investment income on both parties.