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.
20 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1906–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nat'l Bank of Honea Path v. Barrett Co.green2 sentences1990Barrett, Jr., & Co. , 173 S.C. 1 , 174 S.E. 581, 582 [1934]; `If it be conceded that there may be deduced by a process of unusual finesse of reasoning that there is a scintilla of evidence * * * nevertheless there is another rule, more founded upon common sense and reason, to the effect that when only one reasonable inference not just one inference, but one reasonable inference, can be deduced from the evidence, it becomes a question of law for the court, and not a question of fact for the jury.' Small would create a scintilla of evidence by bootstrapping her claim based on her own conclusions 1990Barrett, Jr., & Co. , 173 S.C. 1 , 174 S.E. 581, 582 [1934]; `If it be conceded that there may be deduced by a process of unusual finesse of reasoning that there is a scintilla of evidence * * * nevertheless there is another rule, more founded upon common sense and reason, to the effect that when only one reasonable inference not just one inference, but one reasonable inference, can be deduced from the evidence, it becomes a question of law for the court, and not a question of fact for the jury.' Small would create a scintilla of evidence by bootstrapping her claim based on her own conclusions | 1 | 11 |
Byrd v. Irmo High Schoolgreen2 sentences2021See, e.g., Byrd v. Irmo High School, 321 S.C. 426, 431-32 , 468 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1996). 2021See, e.g., Byrd v. Irmo High School, 321 S.C. 426, 431-32 , 468 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1996). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Huntergreen2 sentences2008In State v. Hunter, this Court held that juror testimony involving internal misconduct may be received only when necessary to ensure fundamental fairness. 320 S.C. 85, 88 , 463 S.E.2d 314, 316 (1995). 2008In State v. Hunter, this Court held that juror testimony involving internal misconduct may be received only when necessary to ensure fundamental fairness. 320 S.C. 85, 88 , 463 S.E.2d 314, 316 (1995). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hendersongreen2 sentences1991This Court has recognized the defense of necessity in the prison escape context. *49 See State v. Henderson , 298 S.C. 331 , 380 S.E. (2d) 817 (1989); State v. Worley , 265 S.C. 551 , 220 S.E. (2d) 242 (1975). 1991This Court has recognized the defense of necessity in the prison escape context. *49 See State v. Henderson , 298 S.C. 331 , 380 S.E. (2d) 817 (1989); State v. Worley , 265 S.C. 551 , 220 S.E. (2d) 242 (1975). | 1 | 1 |
Beall v. Doegreen1 sentence1987This court has recognized an exception to the general rule requiring pleading where the matter “becomes an issue without objection based upon the lack of pleading.” Beall v. Doe, 281 S. C. 363, 315 S. E. (2d) 186, 188 (Ct. App. 1984). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Taylor v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
green
2 sentences1944"In the case of Taylor v. Railway Co. , 78 S.C. 552 , 556 , 59 S.E., 641 , 643 , this court said: `A scintilla of evidence is any material evidence that, if true, would tend to establish the issue in the mind of a reasonable juror.' (Italics added.) "Whilst adhering to the scintilla rule, this court has recognized a rule supplemental to the scintilla rule, which is thus propounded in the case of National Bank v. Thomas J. 1944"In the case of Taylor v. Railway Co. , 78 S.C. 552 , 556 , 59 S.E., 641 , 643 , this court said: `A scintilla of evidence is any material evidence that, if true, would tend to establish the issue in the mind of a reasonable juror.' (Italics added.) "Whilst adhering to the scintilla rule, this court has recognized a rule supplemental to the scintilla rule, which is thus propounded in the case of National Bank v. Thomas J. | 5 | 1934–1944 |
Cooper River Park & Playground Commission v. City of North Charleston
neutral
2 sentences1994Cooper River Park and Playground Comm’n v. City of No. Charleston, 273 S.C. 639 , 259 S.E. (2d) 107 (1979). 1994Cooper River Park and Playground Comm’n v. City of No. Charleston, 273 S.C. 639 , 259 S.E. (2d) 107 (1979). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
State v. Briggs
neutral
2 sentences1991State v. Briggs , 3 S.C.L. 8 (1 Brev.) (1794). 1991State v. Briggs, 3 S.C.L. 8 (1 Brev.) (1794). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. Worley
green
2 sentences1991This Court has recognized the defense of necessity in the prison escape context. *49 See State v. Henderson , 298 S.C. 331 , 380 S.E. (2d) 817 (1989); State v. Worley , 265 S.C. 551 , 220 S.E. (2d) 242 (1975). 1991This Court has recognized the defense of necessity in the prison escape context. *49 See State v. Henderson , 298 S.C. 331 , 380 S.E. (2d) 817 (1989); State v. Worley , 265 S.C. 551 , 220 S.E. (2d) 242 (1975). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Duncan v. County of York
green
2 sentences1980By reading Sections 1, 7, and 17 of Article VIII together, the court in Duncan v. York County, 267 S. C. 327, 228 S. E. (2d) 92 (1976), reasoned that specific legislation necessary to bring about an orderly transition to home rule is constitutionally permissible. 1980By reading Sections 1, 7, and 17 of Article VIII together, the court in Duncan v. York County , 267 S.C. 327 , 228 S.E. (2d) 92 (1976), reasoned that specific legislation necessary to bring about an orderly transition to home rule is constitutionally permissible. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Spencer v. Kirby
green
1 sentence1960Barrett, Jr., & Co., 173 S. C. 1, 174 S. E. 581 , 582: “If it he conceded that there may be deduced by a process of *377 unusual finesse of reasoning that there is a scintilla of evidence * * * nevertheless there is another rule, more founded upon common sense and reason, to the effect that when only one reasonable inference, not just one inference, but one reasonable inference, can be deduced from the evidence, it becomes a question of law for the Court, and not a question of fact for the jury.” ’ “He concludes by stating: ‘This declaration is but to say that the scintilla of evidence upon wh | 1 | 1960–1960 |
City of Chester v. National Surety Co.
neutral
1 sentence1934Barrett, Jr., & Co., 173 S. C., 1, 174 S. E., 581 , 582: “If it be conceded that there may be deduced by a process of unusual finesse of reasoning that there is a scintilla of evidence * * * nevertheless there is another rule, more founded upon common sense and reason, to the effect that when only one reasonable inference, not just one inference, but one reasonable inference, can be deduced from the evidence, it becomes a question of law for the Court, and not a question of fact for the jury.” In the case of City of Chester v. National Surety Co., 91 S. C., 17, 74 S. E., 37, 39 , that sound ju | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Owens v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
neutral
1 sentence1930In the case of Owens v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad, 141 S. C., 359, at page 364, 139 S. E., 779, 780 , the Court said: “The appellant lays great stress upon the testimony as to the custom of blowing the whistle before taking out the train after inspection was completed. | 1 | 1930–1930 |
Brabham v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
green
1 sentence1906Co., 71 S. C., 53, 56, 50 S. E., 716 , Mr. Justice Jones, in speaking for the Court, on this subject, says: “In determining who are fellow-servants, the test or rule in this *492 State is, not whether the servants are of different grade, rank or authority, one of them having power to control and direct the services of another, but the test is in the character of the act being performed by the offending servant, whether it was the performance of some duty the master owed to the injured servant, the performance of which duty the master had entrusted to the offending servant.” Was Ballock, the su | 1 | 1906–1906 |
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.