Home (page 16)

Tag Archives: Tort/Negligence

Civil Practice – Appeals – Tort/Negligence – Breach of Fiduciary Duty – Punitive Damages (access required)

Mazloom v. Mazloom The issue of the sufficiency of the evidence to support a breach of fiduciary duty is not preserved for review because it was not raised in the petition for rehearing to the Court of Appeals. As to the remaining issue, we find no error by the Court of Appeals in affirming the award of punitive damages.

Read More »

Labor & Employment – FLSA – Donning & Doffing Protective Gear – Changing Clothes – Workers’ Compensation – Wrongful Termination Claims – Tort/Negligence – Invasion of Privacy – Inadvertent (access required)

Atkinson v. House of Raeford Farms, Inc. According to the defendant-employer's longstanding practice and a Fourth Circuit ruling in a similar case, the plaintiff-employees' donning and doffing of protective gear constitutes "changing clothes," and the employer is not required to pay them for the time spent doing it.

Read More »

Workers’ Compensation – Statutory Employer – Parent Company – Tort/Negligence – Slip & Fall (access required)

Maloney v. Landmark Tours & Travel, Inc. After a Savannah tourism company bought a Hilton Head tourism company, the Hilton Head company's transportation manager became the statutory employee of the Savannah company. The employee can only sue the Savannah company for his slip and fall on company property under the Workers' Compensation Act.

Read More »

Court: Recklessness should be weighed in comparative negligence (access required)

A homeowner who has workers performing maintenance on her home allegedly refuses to turn off her automatic sprinkler system despite workers' requests. Later, a worker slips on a wet ladder and falls. He sues, claiming the homeowner was reckless, and the homeowner asserts the worker was negligent. In a real-life suit from Florence County, that scenario raised a novel question under South Carolina's comparative negligence system: Could a jury compare and offset the plaintiff's alleged ordinary negligence against the defendant's alleged recklessness? It could indeed, the state Supreme Court said in an April 4 first-impression decision. Edward L. Graham (pictured), a lawyer for the worker, hailed the decision.

Read More »