South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Where a class action lawsuit resulted in the dismissal of 10 out of 64 plaintiffs and settled for a total damages award of only 3% the initial amount sought, an award of attorneys’ fees that was almost double the amount ...

Where a Hungarian businessman sold a company to another Hungarian company, violating an injunction, the Hungarian company’s participation in the businessman’s injunction violation was insufficient to provide the court a basis for exercising personal jurisdiction over it. Background In the ...

A company president is not personally responsible for a multi-million dollar judgment because he was never personally named in the complaint. However, the president might be liable for sanctions because of his conduct during the discovery. Background In December 2010, ...

Rule 59(b), SCRCP, says a new-trial motion “shall be made promptly after the jury is discharged.” Nevertheless, plaintiff’s new-trial motion was timely when it was made after the verdict was published but while the jury was still in the jury ...

Although the denial of an application to compel arbitration is appealable under S.C. Code Ann. § 15-48-200, given the procedural posture of this case – appeal after denial of defendants’ motion to set aside default – we find no appealable ...

  Since plaintiff’s claims arise out of an unincorporated association’s alleged use of photographs of a Charleston baseball stadium, the court has specific jurisdiction over the unincorporated association, which has as a “core business” the ownership of a Minor League ...

Even though African-Americans appear to be disparately impacted by a traffic loop that is put in place for Myrtle Beach’s Atlantic Beach Bikefest (Black Bike Week), plaintiffs have not shown that defendants’ use of the traffic loop is the result ...

Reporter’s complaint against individual agents of the Department of Justice and the United States Postal Service who allegedly engaged in illegal surveillance activities against her and her family were dismissed because the individual agents had still not been identified more ...

A plaintiff was entitled to collect on a contempt award against a national business franchise by garnishing two bank accounts in the franchise’s name because the current owner of the franchise failed to establish that it had actually loaned money ...

  A plaintiff was entitled to collect on a contempt award against a national business franchise by garnishing two bank accounts in the franchise’s name because the current owner of the franchise failed to establish that it had actually loaned ...