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.
24 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Welch v. Epsteingreen2 sentences2025"When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, an appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial." Welch v. Epstein, 342 S.C. 279, 311 , 536 S.E.2d 408, 425 (Ct. App. 2000). 2025"When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, an appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial." Welch v. Epstein, 342 S.C. 279, 311 , 536 S.E.2d 408, 425 (Ct. App. 2000). | 10 | 11 |
Daves v. Clearygreen2 sentences2015A jury charge which is substantially correct and covers the law does not require reversal.’ ”) (ellipsis in original); id. at 310, 628 S.E.2d at 513 (citing Daves v. Cleary, 355 S.C. 216, 224 , 584 S.E.2d 423, 427 (Ct.App.2003)) (“When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, the appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial.”). 2015A jury charge which is substantially correct and covers the law does not require reversal.’ ”) (ellipsis in original); id. at 310, 628 S.E.2d at 513 (citing Daves v. Cleary, 355 S.C. 216, 224 , 584 S.E.2d 423, 427 (Ct.App.2003)) (“When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, the appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial.”). | 9 | 9 |
Burroughs v. Worshamgreen2 sentences2015A jury charge which is substantially correct and covers the law does not require reversal.’ ”) (ellipsis in original); id. at 310, 628 S.E.2d at 513 (citing Daves v. Cleary, 355 S.C. 216, 224 , 584 S.E.2d 423, 427 (Ct.App.2003)) (“When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, the appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial.”). 2015A jury charge which is substantially correct and covers the law does not require reversal.'") (ellipsis in original); id. at 310, 628 S.E.2d at 513 (citing Daves v. Cleary, 355 S.C. 216, 224 , 584 S.E.2d 423, 427 (Ct.App.2003)) ("When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, the appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial."). | 3 | 5 |
Cole v. Rautgreen2 sentences2025"An appellate court will not reverse the trial court's decision regarding jury instructions unless the trial court committed an abuse of discretion." Cole v. Raut, 378 S.C. 398, 404 , 663 S.E.2d 30, 33 (2008). 2025"An appellate court will not reverse the trial court's decision regarding jury instructions unless the trial court committed an abuse of discretion." Cole v. Raut, 378 S.C. 398, 404 , 663 S.E.2d 30, 33 (2008). | 2 | 2 |
Dalon v. Golden Lanes, Inc.green2 sentences2014See Welch v. Epstein, 342 S.C. 279, 311 , 536 S.E.2d 408, 425 (Ct. App. 2000) ("When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, an appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial."); Dalon v. Golden Lanes, Inc., 320 S.C. 534, 540 , 466 S.E.2d 368, 372 (Ct. App. 1996) ("It is the trial court's function to charge the jury on the applicable law as raised by the pleadings and supported by the evidence."). 2014See Welch v. Epstein, 342 S.C. 279, 311 , 536 S.E.2d 408, 425 (Ct. App. 2000) ("When reviewing a jury charge for alleged error, an appellate court must consider the charge as a whole in light of the evidence and issues presented at trial."); Dalon v. Golden Lanes, Inc., 320 S.C. 534, 540 , 466 S.E.2d 368, 372 (Ct. App. 1996) ("It is the trial court's function to charge the jury on the applicable law as raised by the pleadings and supported by the evidence."). | 1 | 1 |
Berberich v. Jackgreen2 sentences2014An erroneous jury charge will not result in a verdict being reversed unless the charge prejudiced the appellant's case." (citations omitted)); Berberich v. Jack, 392 S.C. 278, 290 , 709 S.E.2d 607, 613 (2011) (finding jury charge issue unpreserved when the instruction was not objected to at trial). 2014An erroneous jury charge will not result in a verdict being reversed unless the charge prejudiced the appellant's case." (citations omitted)); Berberich v. Jack, 392 S.C. 278, 290 , 709 S.E.2d 607, 613 (2011) (finding jury charge issue unpreserved when the instruction was not objected to at trial). | 1 | 1 |
Koutsogiannis v. BB & Tgreen2 sentences2006Daves v. Cleary, 355 S.C. 216, 224 , 584 S.E.2d 423, 427 (Ct.App.2003). ‘Where a request to charge is timely made and involves a controlling legal principle, a refusal by the trial judge to charge the request constitutes reversible error.” Koutsogiannis v. BB&T, 365 S.C. 145, 149 , 616 S.E.2d 425, 427-28 (2005). 2006Daves v. Cleary, 355 S.C. 216, 224 , 584 S.E.2d 423, 427 (Ct.App.2003). ‘Where a request to charge is timely made and involves a controlling legal principle, a refusal by the trial judge to charge the request constitutes reversible error.” Koutsogiannis v. BB&T, 365 S.C. 145, 149 , 616 S.E.2d 425, 427-28 (2005). | 1 | 1 |
O'Neal v. Bowlesgreen2 sentences2002See O'Neal v. Bowles, 314 S.C. 525 , 431 S.E.2d 555 (1993); Hunter v. Staples, 335 S.C. 93 , 515 S.E.2d 261 (Ct.App.1999). 34 . 2002See O'Neal v. Bowles, 314 S.C. 525 , 431 S.E.2d 555 (1993); Hunter v. Staples, 335 S.C. 93 , 515 S.E.2d 261 (Ct.App.1999). 34 . | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wells v. Halyard
green
1 sentence2009Id. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Hunter v. Staples
green
2 sentences2002See O'Neal v. Bowles, 314 S.C. 525 , 431 S.E.2d 555 (1993); Hunter v. Staples, 335 S.C. 93 , 515 S.E.2d 261 (Ct.App.1999). 34 . 2002See O'Neal v. Bowles, 314 S.C. 525 , 431 S.E.2d 555 (1993); Hunter v. Staples, 335 S.C. 93 , 515 S.E.2d 261 (Ct.App.1999). 34 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.