Defendants’ expert opined that defendants lost the opportunity to sell their business for $60 million because plaintiff filed this lawsuit; therefore, the $60 million in damages are not attributable to any unfair trade practice by plaintiff. The court grants plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment as to defendants’ unfair trade practices counterclaim. The defense expert also […]
The South Carolina tort of intentional interference with contractual relations requires proof of damages, not merely injury. Plaintiff’s own expert says, “Since it is not possible to reliably calculate the value of [plaintiff’s] losses, monetary damages cannot adequately compensate [plaintiff] for these losses”; consequently, plaintiff has failed to make out a claim for intentional interfe[...]
Civil Practice – Damages – Settlement – Setoff – Mediation Confidentiality – Tort/Negligence – Slip & Fall
This opinion has been withdrawn. Even though mediation proceedings are confidential, a settlement agreement reached in mediation is not confidential under Rule 8, SCADR. The trial court should have considered the settlement agreement to determine whether defendant was entitled to a setoff pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-50. We reverse the trial court’s denial […]
SIB Development & Consulting, Inc. v. Save Mart Supermarkets (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-158-17, 7 pp.) (Patrick Michael Duffy, J.) 2:17-cv-00425; D.S.C. Holding: In support of its unfair trade practices counterclaim, defendant argues that it has suffered actual damages because it has spent time and money responding to plaintiff’s claims; however, the South Carolina Unfair Trade […]
Benjamin v. Shaw (Lawyers Weekly No. 002-101-17, 21 pp.) (R. Bryan Harwell, J.) 4:15-cv-05110; D.S.C. Holding: Even though plaintiff presented as evidence only (1) her ward’s post-accident medical expenses ($775,431.87), (2) photos of the horrific traffic accident, and (3) her own lay testimony about the ward’s condition as she has cared for him in the […]
Sharma v. USA International LLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 001-062-17, 13 pp.) (Niemeyer, J.) No. 15-2188, March 17, 2017; USDC at Alexandria, Va. (O’Grady, J.) 4th Cir. Holding: A plaintiff who sued for fraud, alleging he discovered after purchasing two franchise restaurants that the sellers had provided inflated monthly sales figures that included an owner allegedly […]
Tort/Negligence – Damages – Contract — Warranty – Civil Practice – Statute of Limitations – Faulty Windows – Wisconsin Law
Meifert v. MI Windows & Doors, Inc. In their amended complaint, plaintiffs continue to assert that their windows, which were allegedly designed, manufactured, and sold by defendant, caused direct economic loss to the windows and other property in the home and consequential economic loss. Recovery for such damages is barred by the economic loss doctrine.
Whitlock v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co. Pursuant to a question certified to this court by the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, we hold that where, as here, a title insurance contract does not clearly identify a date for measuring the diminution in value of the insured property or otherwise unambiguously provide for the method of valuation as a result of a title defec[...]
Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. J.T. Walker Industries Even though there was evidence from which the jury could find that the plaintiff-insurer acted in bad faith when it settled claims that had been filed against the defendant-insured, the insured failed to prove how it was damaged by any such bad faith.
Uhlig, LLC v. Shirely Plaintiff was able to ascertain and present evidence of the amount of its loss, and plaintiff has obtained an adequate remedy at law through the jury’s award of monetary damages. Because the purpose of an accounting is to determine the amount due to the aggrieved party, an accounting of assets would be improper here.
Uhlig LLC v. Shirley The misappropriated trade secrets at issue are customer preferences and pricing that plaintiff acquired when it bought defendant Shirley’s former employer four years ago. Where a jury awarded plaintiff damages for defendants’ misappropriation of those trade secrets, plaintiff is not entitled to a permanent injunction which would bar defendants from soliciting or p[...]
Tort/Negligence – Election of Remedies — Climbing Tower – Fall – Strict Liability – Negligent Design – Negligent Training – Damages
Keeter v. Alpine Towers Even though plaintiff alleged that defendant committed several torts, plaintiff only sought one remedy: damages resulting from his broken back. The trial court should not have required plaintiff to make an election among the jury’s verdicts.
- Economy forces attorneys to get down to business
- Business Court judges trawl for customers
- Va. company's Web site did not subject business to personal jurisdiction in S.C., appeals panel rules
- Former running back from S.C. wins courtroom victory in contract dispute
- Contract – Government Contract – Qui Tam – False Claims Act
- Licenses & Permits – Beer & Wine Permit – Restrictive Covenant – Suitable Location
- Consumer Protection – FCRA – Auto Loan – Bank Accounting Errors
- Licenses & Permits – Veterinarian – Vaccine Maintenance
- Tort – Business Tort – Va. Computer Crimes Act – Trade Secrets
- Textile firm, railroad settle Graniteville train wreck lawsuit
- State regulators look at car dealer accused of lying to customers
- Subprime mortgage meltdown hits securities law
- Stericycle decision forces evaluation of policies, practices
- Are workplace DEI policies still legal after SCOTUS decisions?
- Court cases add new twists to legal language
- It’s all business, especially the busyness
- Virginia Tech student got due process in hearing
- High court justices cross the line of propriety
- High court’s term was rough on big business
- The flip side of generative AI in law and how to address it
- The fight for equal educational opportunity continues
- Letter From The Editor – Working from Home
- NLRB joins FTC in taking aim at non-competes
- Supreme Court leaves key internet protection untouched