South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Even though the plaintiff-customer, who slipped and fell on an allegedly over-waxed floor in a Marshalls store, has settled with the defendant-store and the defendant-cleaning subcontractor, there remain genuine issues of fact as to whether the cleaning subcontractor must indemnify ...

The plaintiff-patient says, if defendants had revealed that their drug—used for treating bipolar disorder—caused gynecomastia (enlarged breasts) in males, his doctor would have disclosed this risk to plaintiff, and his guardian would have made a different medical decision. There is ...

In the parties’ insurance policy’s “Service of Suit” provision, the defendant-insurer says that, if it fails to pay a claim, it will, “at the request of the Insured … submit to the jurisdiction of any court of competent jurisdiction with ...

Plaintiff has standing to sue defendants for securities fraud. He bought corporate bonds after defendants issued an official statement outlining generic risk factors inherent in the construction of a nuclear power plant. Plaintiff alleges that, at the time defendants issued ...

The parties’ sublease agreement required the defendant-sublessor to return the plaintiff-sublessee’s deposit if plaintiff were unable to obtain the zoning changes and permits needed for plaintiff to install its business on the leased premises. Despite extending the agreement several times, ...

Plaintiffs, James Brown’s adult children, allege that defendants—Brown’s widow, his youngest child, his estate’s personal representative, and the limited special administrator and limited special trustee of Brown’s estate and trust—have entered into agreements which violate the termination provisions of the ...

In its pleadings, the defendant-insurer asserted that plaintiff could not recover on its uninsured motorist claims because defendant provided only excess coverage. Defendant waited until the summary judgment stage to argue that plaintiff’s claims failed because plaintiff had not sued ...

Plaintiff alleges that defendants arranged for transportation of property, using an unsafe trucking company whose negligence resulted in a traffic accident. Plaintiff’s allegations support only an inference that the trucking company and driver were independent contractors—not employees—of defendants. Furthermore, she ...

In its pleadings, the defendant-insurer asserted that plaintiff could not recover on its uninsured motorist claims because defendant provided only excess coverage. Defendant waited until the summary judgment stage to argue that plaintiff’s claims failed because plaintiff had not sued ...

Statute of limitations could not be equitably estopped or tolled where decedent’s attorney had knowledge of the facts underlying the estate’s claim that could be imputed to decedent. We grant defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment based on the statute ...