Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 South Carolina opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by South Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Elam v. South Carolina Department of Transportationgreen2 sentences2026See Elam v. S.C. Dep't of Transp., 361 S.C. 9, 23 , 602 S.E.2d 772, 779-80 (2004) ("Issues and arguments are preserved for appellate review only when they are raised to and ruled on by the lower court."); id. at 24 , 602 S.E.2d at 780 ("A party must file [a Rule 59(e) motion] when an issue or argument has been raised, but not ruled on, in order to preserve it for appellate review."). 2026See Elam v. S.C. Dep't of Transp., 361 S.C. 9, 23 , 602 S.E.2d 772, 779-80 (2004) ("Issues and arguments are preserved for appellate review only when they are raised to and ruled on by the lower court."); id. at 24 , 602 S.E.2d at 780 ("A party must file [a Rule 59(e) motion] when an issue or argument has been raised, but not ruled on, in order to preserve it for appellate review."). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Walter M.green2 sentences2025We hold Appellants' arguments that Grapevine was estopped from enforcing the attorney's fees provision in the Lease, that the Lease prohibited Grapevine from obtaining attorney's fees incurred in pursuing extra-contractual damages, and that the redacted invoices were insufficient to provide a reasonable basis for the trial court to award attorney's fees are not preserved for review.3 See, e.g., In re Walter M., 386 S.C. 387, 392 , 688 S.E.2d 133, 136 (Ct. App. 2009) ("Generally, an issue must be both raised to and ruled upon by the trial court in order to be preserved for appellate review."). 2025We hold Appellants' arguments that Grapevine was estopped from enforcing the attorney's fees provision in the Lease, that the Lease prohibited Grapevine from obtaining attorney's fees incurred in pursuing extra-contractual damages, and that the redacted invoices were insufficient to provide a reasonable basis for the trial court to award attorney's fees are not preserved for review.3 See, e.g., In re Walter M., 386 S.C. 387, 392 , 688 S.E.2d 133, 136 (Ct. App. 2009) ("Generally, an issue must be both raised to and ruled upon by the trial court in order to be preserved for appellate review."). | 1 | 1 |
Jackson v. Speedgreen2 sentences2007See Jackson v. Speed, 326 S.C. 289, 308 , 486 S.E.2d 750, 760 (1997) (“[A]n award for attorney’s fees will be affirmed so long as sufficient evidence in the record supports each factor.”); McMaster v. Strickland, 322 S.C. 451, 455 , 472 S.E.2d 623, 626 (1996) (affirming special referee’s award of attorney’s fees notwithstanding his failure to make specific findings about each of the six Blumberg factors because the record contained ample support for each of the six factors). 2007See Jackson v. Speed, 326 S.C. 289, 308 , 486 S.E.2d 750, 760 (1997) (“[A]n award for attorney’s fees will be affirmed so long as sufficient evidence in the record supports each factor.”); McMaster v. Strickland, 322 S.C. 451, 455 , 472 S.E.2d 623, 626 (1996) (affirming special referee’s award of attorney’s fees notwithstanding his failure to make specific findings about each of the six Blumberg factors because the record contained ample support for each of the six factors). | 1 | 1 |
McMaster v. Stricklandgreen2 sentences2007See Jackson v. Speed, 326 S.C. 289, 308 , 486 S.E.2d 750, 760 (1997) (“[A]n award for attorney’s fees will be affirmed so long as sufficient evidence in the record supports each factor.”); McMaster v. Strickland, 322 S.C. 451, 455 , 472 S.E.2d 623, 626 (1996) (affirming special referee’s award of attorney’s fees notwithstanding his failure to make specific findings about each of the six Blumberg factors because the record contained ample support for each of the six factors). 2007See Jackson v. Speed, 326 S.C. 289, 308 , 486 S.E.2d 750, 760 (1997) (“[A]n award for attorney’s fees will be affirmed so long as sufficient evidence in the record supports each factor.”); McMaster v. Strickland, 322 S.C. 451, 455 , 472 S.E.2d 623, 626 (1996) (affirming special referee’s award of attorney’s fees notwithstanding his failure to make specific findings about each of the six Blumberg factors because the record contained ample support for each of the six factors). | 1 | 1 |
Glasscock v. Glasscockgreen2 sentences2000As our supreme court stated in Glasscock v. Glasscock, 304 S.C. 158, 161 , 403 S.E.2d 313, 315 (1991), the factor “contingency of compensation” does not refer to the nature of the fee agreement. 2000As our supreme court stated in Glasscock v. Glasscock, 304 S.C. 158, 161 , 403 S.E.2d 313, 315 (1991), the factor “contingency of compensation” does not refer to the nature of the fee agreement. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Blumberg v. Nealco, Inc.
green
2 sentences2005In fact, “[o]n appeal, absent sufficient evidentiary support on the record for each factor, the award should be reversed *244 and the issue remanded for the trial court to make specific findings of fact.” Rowell, 360 S.C. at 186 , 600 S.E.2d at 99 (quoting Blumberg, 310 S.C. at 494 , 427 S.E.2d at 661 ). 2005In fact, “[o]n appeal, absent sufficient evidentiary support on the record for each factor, the award should be reversed *244 and the issue remanded for the trial court to make specific findings of fact.” Rowell, 360 S.C. at 186 , 600 S.E.2d at 99 (quoting Blumberg, 310 S.C. at 494 , 427 S.E.2d at 661 ). | 2 | 2000–2005 |
Rowell v. Whisnant
green
2 sentences2005In Rowell v. Whisnant, 360 S.C. 181 , 600 S.E.2d 96 (Ct.App.2004), this Court explicated: Trial courts make specific findings of fact on the record for each of the factors set out above [the Blumberg factors]. 2005In Rowell v. Whisnant, 360 S.C. 181 , 600 S.E.2d 96 (Ct.App.2004), this Court explicated: Trial courts make specific findings of fact on the record for each of the factors set out above [the Blumberg factors]. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Collins v. Collins
green
2 sentences2000Blumberg , at 493, 427 S.E.2d at 660 (citing Collins v. Collins, 239 S.C. 170 , 122 S.E.2d 1 (1961) (involved an award of attorney fees to the wife against the husband in a divorce case)). 2000Blumberg , at 493, 427 S.E.2d at 660 (citing Collins v. Collins, 239 S.C. 170 , 122 S.E.2d 1 (1961) (involved an award of attorney fees to the wife against the husband in a divorce case)). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
United States Rubber Co. v. White Tire Co.
green
2 sentences1992Ordinarily, the termination of a lease will terminate a lessor’s right to future payments, United States Rubber Co. v. White Tire Co., 231 S.C. 84 , 97 S.E. (2d) 403 (1956). 1992Ordinarily, the termination of a lease will terminate a lessor’s right to future payments, United States Rubber Co. v. White Tire Co., 231 S.C. 84 , 97 S.E. (2d) 403 (1956). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.