South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Although written contracts may be orally modified, there is a genuine issue of fact as to whether a purported modification of the parties’ highway-project subcontract was the subject of a passing conversation or of actual negotiations. The court denies the ...

Because the court’s preliminary injunction does not impede the defendant-attorney’s ability to practice law—it only prohibits him from infringing on his father’s firm’s trademarks—the injunction does not implicate South Carolina Rule of Professional Conduct 5.6. The court grants plaintiff’s motion ...

Where the government changed its position regarding the standard of review in a letter submitted the day before oral argument, this “eleventh-hour” submission was rejected. In a case of first impression, it was found that the district court had the ...

Although the defendant argued that a de novo standard of review should be applied to the district court’s intrinsic evidence ruling, the appellate court applied an abuse of discretion standard as required by its precedent. Background Defendant Donald Bush appeals ...

Although the district court erred in instructing the jury about the legal principles it was required to apply to determine the methamphetamine quantity attributable to the defendant, any error was harmless because it did not seriously affect the fairness, integrity ...

Where the Board of Immigration Appeals, or BIA, remands a case to the immigration judge for background checks, the court joins the majority of circuits in holding the BIA’s decision is not a final order of removal for purposes of ...

Although the defendant raised multiple issues on appeal, including that his trial should have been delayed, an expert should have been excluded, he was denied a right to testify and there were errors during sentencing, each of his arguments was ...

Respondent took retainers from clients but then failed to act diligently on their behalf, to communicate with them, to respond to their demands for their files and refunds, or to respond to disciplinary actions against him. Respondent violated Rules 1.1 ...

Plaintiff’s claims of malicious prosecution and defamation are separate causes of action with distinct elements; moreover, even if the same allegedly false claims by defendants India and Dallas Kozel created the factual predicate for both causes of actions, there are ...

In an underlying lawsuit, plaintiff alleged that Johnny Jones caused an accident while driving a repossessed vehicle that his company had been hired to detail for American Acceptance Corporation, to which the defendant-insurer had issued a business auto policy. Viewing ...