State v. Davis — Uninvestigated juror communication requires new trial
The Court of Appeals reversed a murder conviction because the trial court failed to question a juror after credible evidence of discussions with an outsider.
Uncategorized
South Carolina
Uncategorized
SC Public Interest Foundation v. Oconee County — Bond challenge was filed too late
The South Carolina Supreme Court held that a challenge to the authorized use of county bond proceeds was subject to section 11-15-30’s twenty-day filing deadline.
Uncategorized
In re Smoot — Court reprimands lawyer over unissued title policy
The South Carolina Supreme Court publicly reprimanded a lawyer who accepted title-policy fees but failed to issue the policy, respond to the client, or preserve the file.
Uncategorized
ACLU v. Wilson — Public execution-team information falls outside secrecy law
The South Carolina Supreme Court held that the execution-secrecy statute does not cover public or nonconfidential identifying information and does not punish its later repetition.
Uncategorized
A. Tebele & Sons v. Certain Underwriters — Fire-loss coverage denial and agent verdict affirmed
The Court of Appeals affirmed across the board. The policy was not ambiguous merely because the endorsement used no special symbol next to the insured location or left the word “maintained” undefined. Read as a whole, the documents identified properties represented as fully sprinklered, and requiring a sprinkler system to be maintained in complete working order could not reasonably cover a system that had never been connected or made operational. Language covering additions under construction did not transform the unfinished sprinkler work into coverage for the destroyed building.
Uncategorized
Bunch v. USC — Court rejects COVID-19 tuition refund claims
The South Carolina Court of Appeals held that USC did not promise face-to-face instruction and that students showed no recoverable damages from the spring 2020 move online.
Uncategorized
U.S. Bank Trust v. Singleton — Foreclosure rulings reversed after note-holder errors
The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. Under South Carolina law, transfer of the secured note carries the mortgage, so the master erred by finding Waterfall was the note holder but not the mortgage holder. The court also required reconsideration of the foreclosure demand and proper allocation of insurance proceeds under the record and contract. On remand, the court must consider interest, escrow charges, corporate advances, attorney’s fees, and the prior servicer’s possible application of proceeds to missed payments.
Uncategorized
State v. Carroll — Cell-phone and tower evidence survives suppression challenge
The Court of Appeals affirmed. Carroll lacked a personal Fourth Amendment interest in the victim’s phone and therefore could not suppress evidence based on its search. The warrants concerning his own phone and the carrier records were supported by the investigation and, in any event, were executed in objectively reasonable reliance on judicial authorization. Sworn oral testimony could supplement a facially sparse affidavit, and the record supported application of the Leon good-faith doctrine.
Uncategorized
McConnell v. McConnell — Discovery dispute in contempt case is not immediately appealable
The Court of Appeals dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Orders granting or denying discovery are interlocutory and do not become immediately appealable merely because they arise in a post-divorce contempt proceeding. The panel expressly recognized the force of the husband’s argument and concern about inconsistent family-court practices, but precedent required review to wait until a final appealable order. A concurrence emphasized the need for eventual guidance on discovery in complex contempt matters.
Uncategorized
Hasian v. Queen — Probate fee award and conversion finding affirmed as modified
The Court of Appeals affirmed the probate and circuit court orders with a modification to the fee award. The record supported rejection of the purported will, a finding that Hasian converted estate assets, and an award of litigation expenses under the Probate Code’s authority to allocate costs as justice and equity require. The court clarified the proper legal basis and scope of recoverable fees rather than treating every requested theory as interchangeable.
Uncategorized
In re Brown — Four complaints and noncooperation lead to one-year suspension
The Supreme Court accepted the agreement and suspended Brown for one year. The sanction reflected both the client-service violations and repeated failure to cooperate with the disciplinary system, considered alongside his prior discipline. Brown must comply with the rule governing suspended lawyers, pay disciplinary costs, and complete Ethics School within one year after reinstatement.
Uncategorized
In re Gilchrist — COVID-loan dishonesty results in eighteen-month suspension
The Supreme Court accepted discipline by consent and imposed an eighteen-month definite suspension, retroactive to Gilchrist’s July 29, 2022 interim suspension. The court stressed the seriousness of financial dishonesty, misrepresentations, and her failure to self-report the indictment. Cooperation, repayment, and other mitigation did not reduce the sanction below the agreed range. She must also pay the investigation and prosecution costs.
Uncategorized
In re Compton — Client neglect and trust delay warrant public reprimand
The Supreme Court accepted the agreement and publicly reprimanded Compton. It found violations of the professional rules governing competence, diligence, communication, and related responsibilities. The court also required payment of disciplinary costs, an assessment through Lawyers Helping Lawyers with compliance with resulting recommendations, and completion of Ethics School within one year.
Uncategorized
In re Owen — Repeated professional misconduct brings six-month suspension
The Supreme Court accepted the agreement and imposed a definite six-month suspension. It treated the pattern and Owen’s disciplinary history as important aggravating considerations, while also considering the mitigating material submitted with the agreement. Owen must comply with the rule governing suspended lawyers, pay disciplinary costs, and complete the Legal Ethics and Practice Program Ethics School within one year.
Uncategorized
SCDSS v. Pimienta — Preponderance standard upheld in child-protection intervention
The South Carolina Supreme Court held that due process permits the preponderance standard in a child-protection intervention and affirmed the abuse finding and Central Registry placement.
Uncategorized
Watertoys v. SCDOR — Defective tax-appeal bond defeats jurisdiction
The South Carolina Court of Appeals dismissed a tax appeal because money placed in counsel’s IOLTA account and a personal surety did not satisfy the statutory pre-appeal payment or bond requirement.
Uncategorized
Estate of Barringer — Constructive-trust claim survives summary judgment
The South Carolina Court of Appeals revived a constructive-trust theory based on an alleged promise not to use a testamentary power of appointment to alter a family company’s voting control.
Uncategorized
Glassmeyer v. Lottery Commission — Court limits sweeping FOIA demands
The South Carolina Court of Appeals upheld lottery-winner privacy protections, signature redactions, and relief from FOIA requests requiring millions of dollars and thousands of staff hours.
Uncategorized
Heatley v. State — Supreme Court retires the Logan circumstantial-evidence charge
The South Carolina Supreme Court affirmed denial of post-conviction relief and held that trial counsel need not request the Logan circumstantial-evidence instruction.
Uncategorized
Henson v. SCDC — Supreme Court rejects statewide detention class certification
The South Carolina Supreme Court reversed certification of two statewide detention classes, holding that individualized issues overwhelmed any common question and clarifying the exceptional route for immediate review.
Uncategorized
Mt. Pleasant Investments v. Charleston County Assessor — ATI Exemption Caps Tax Value at Pre-Sale Baseline, Not Pre-Sale Plus Pre-ATI Improvements
The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed the Administrative Law Court’s property tax ruling, holding that the “current fair market value” floor for the ATI exemption is the pre-sale value on the assessor’s books—not that value inflated by improvements the prior owner completed before the sale closed. Because the improvements were already incorporated into the ATI fair market value of $8,034,000 used to compute the exemption value, the Assessor’s approach of re-adding them to the current fair market value floor impermissibly double-counted them. The taxable value for tax year 2022 was $6,063,000, not $6,821,000.
Uncategorized
State v. Lee — Trial Court Must Inquire Into Accommodations Before Excusing Hearing-Impaired Juror
The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed and remanded Kendrick Lee’s ABHAN conviction and life-without-parole sentence, holding that the trial court erred by excusing the only Black prospective juror based on a hearing impairment without first conducting an individualized inquiry into whether reasonable accommodations could have enabled that juror to render efficient service, as required by the ADA and S.C. Code Ann. § 14-7-1020.
Uncategorized
State v. Redding — Conviction Reversed; Circumstantial Evidence Raised Only Suspicion of Guilt
The South Carolina Court of Appeals reversed Brian Redding’s murder conviction, holding the circuit court erred in denying his directed verdict motion because the State’s wholly circumstantial case—comprising a difficult relationship, theoretical access to the murder weapon, a clothing change, and trace gunshot-residue on shorts—raised only a suspicion of guilt rather than substantial circumstantial evidence, particularly in light of Redding’s corroborated alibi and innocent explanations for each item of State’s evidence.
Uncategorized
State v. Eberhart — GPS Data from Private Bond Company Requires Warrant; Admission Harmless
The South Carolina Court of Appeals held that a criminal defendant wearing a private bond company’s GPS ankle monitor retains a reasonable expectation of privacy in that location data under the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 10 of the South Carolina Constitution, requiring a warrant; though the trial court erred in admitting the warrantlessly obtained GPS data, the error was harmless given the victim’s in-court identification, the stolen moped evidence, and the victim’s debit card found on the defendant at arrest.