South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Plaintiffs sued defendants for breach of contract and obtained entry of default when defendants failed to timely answer. Although the parties’ contract includes an arbitration provision, defendants are not entitled to an immediate appeal of the denial of their motion ...

When she pleaded guilty to misconduct in office and misuse of public funds, plaintiff also admitted to facts that would have sustained convictions for forgery and perjury. When plaintiff subsequently filed this civil suit based on allegations that directly contradicted ...

In litigation involving the copyright termination rights to a deceased entertainer’s songs, the decedent’s adult children are entitled to discover confidential agreements between the decedent’s estate and defendant Hynie, the mother of one of his children. Hynie has failed to ...

Where the dismissal order neither satisfied the requirements for a judgment nor was entered as a judgment, it did not start the 14-day deadline for filing a motion for attorneys’ fees. As such, the defendant’s motion filed 18 days later ...

In this challenge to a delinquent tax sale, the petitioner-landowners agreed to allow defendants to present their evidence first. In the middle of the trial, after the testimony of just one witness, the special referee made factual findings and issued ...

When defendant HomeAway set up its generally accessible, semi-interactive website, it did not thereby direct electronic activity into South Carolina with the manifest intent of engaging in business or other interactions within this state in particular. The court grants defendant ...

Based on a “straightforward interpretation” of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1), which governs citizenship of corporations, the credit union is a citizen of Virginia because that is its principal place of business. This analysis was not changed by the fact the ...

Although defendant Mahoney did not respond to defendant Davis Roofing Group’s requests to admit, the master-in-equity did not abuse his discretion when he declined to deem the requests admitted. Mahoney, who was proceeding pro se at the time, denied ever ...

Even though defendant failed to file an answer, since plaintiff filed her complaint pursuant to the Tort Claims Act, she is subject to the act’s statutory damages cap of $300,000. We reiterate our holding in Parker v. Spartanburg Sanitary Sewer ...

In support of its Rule 60, SCRCP, motion for a new trial based on juror misconduct, the defendant-city failed to present sufficient evidence that (1) the juror was in fact disqualified by his failure to mention a prior arrest, (2) ...