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.
5 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2009–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Tharpe v. G. E. Moore Co.green2 sentences2013Moore Co., Inc., 254 S.C. 196, 200, 174 S.E.2d 397, 399 (1970)). 2013Moore Co., Inc., 254 S.C. 196, 200, 174 S.E.2d 397, 399 (1970)). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wilkinson v. Palmetto State Transportation Co.
green
2 sentences2021"In evaluating the right of control, the Court examines four factors which serve as a means of analyzing the work relationship as a whole: (1) direct evidence of the right or exercise of control; (2) furnishing of equipment; (3) method of payment; (4) right to fire." Id. 2015“In evaluating the right of control, the Court examines four factors which serve as a means of analyzing the work relationship as a whole: (1) direct evidence of the right or exercise of control; (2) furnishing of equipment; (3) method of payment; (4) right to fire.” Id. | 3 | 2011–2021 |
Chavis v. Watkins
green
2 sentences2013Under the controlling common law rubric of the right of control, “the Court examines four factors which serve as a means of analyzing the work relationship as a whole: (1) direct evidence of the right or exercise of control; (2) furnishing of equipment; (3) method of payment; (4) right to fire.” Id. (citing Ray Covington Realtors, 318 S.C. at 548 , 459 S.E.2d at 303 ; Chavis, 256 S.C. at 32 , 180 S.E.2d at 649 ; Tharpe v. G.E. 2013Under the controlling common law rubric of the right of control, “the Court examines four factors which serve as a means of analyzing the work relationship as a whole: (1) direct evidence of the right or exercise of control; (2) furnishing of equipment; (3) method of payment; (4) right to fire.” Id. (citing Ray Covington Realtors, 318 S.C. at 548 , 459 S.E.2d at 303 ; Chavis, 256 S.C. at 32 , 180 S.E.2d at 649 ; Tharpe v. G.E. | 2 | 2009–2013 |
South Carolina Workers' Compensation Commission v. Ray Covington Realtors, Inc.
green
2 sentences2013Under the controlling common law rubric of the right of control, “the Court examines four factors which serve as a means of analyzing the work relationship as a whole: (1) direct evidence of the right or exercise of control; (2) furnishing of equipment; (3) method of payment; (4) right to fire.” Id. (citing Ray Covington Realtors, 318 S.C. at 548 , 459 S.E.2d at 303 ; Chavis, 256 S.C. at 32 , 180 S.E.2d at 649 ; Tharpe v. G.E. 2013Under the controlling common law rubric of the right of control, “the Court examines four factors which serve as a means of analyzing the work relationship as a whole: (1) direct evidence of the right or exercise of control; (2) furnishing of equipment; (3) method of payment; (4) right to fire.” Id. (citing Ray Covington Realtors, 318 S.C. at 548 , 459 S.E.2d at 303 ; Chavis, 256 S.C. at 32 , 180 S.E.2d at 649 ; Tharpe v. G.E. | 2 | 2009–2013 |
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.