abuse of process claim in South Carolina

17 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2026 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.

Followed or applied (12)

Case	Followed	Cited
Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers International Uniongreen scctapp · 2002 · cited in 3 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2005–2018 2 sentences 2018Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co., 398 S.C. 528, 551-52 , 730 S.E.2d 340, 352 (Ct. App. 2012))); id. at 371, 756 S.E.2d at 133 ("An allegation that a party had a 'bad motive' or an 'ulterior purpose' in bringing an action, standing alone, is insufficient to sustain an abuse of process claim."); Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, 351 S.C. 65, 75 , 567 S.E.2d 251, 255-56 (Ct. App. 2002) ("One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for har 2018Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co., 398 S.C. 528, 551-52 , 730 S.E.2d 340, 352 (Ct. App. 2012))); id. at 371, 756 S.E.2d at 133 ("An allegation that a party had a 'bad motive' or an 'ulterior purpose' in bringing an action, standing alone, is insufficient to sustain an abuse of process claim."); Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, 351 S.C. 65, 75 , 567 S.E.2d 251, 255-56 (Ct. App. 2002) ("One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for har	2	3
Pallares v. Seinargreen sc · 2014 · cited in 2 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2015–2018 2 sentences 2018Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co., 398 S.C. 528, 551-52 , 730 S.E.2d 340, 352 (Ct. App. 2012))); id. at 371, 756 S.E.2d at 133 ("An allegation that a party had a 'bad motive' or an 'ulterior purpose' in bringing an action, standing alone, is insufficient to sustain an abuse of process claim."); Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, 351 S.C. 65, 75 , 567 S.E.2d 251, 255-56 (Ct. App. 2002) ("One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for har 2018Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co., 398 S.C. 528, 551-52 , 730 S.E.2d 340, 352 (Ct. App. 2012))); id. at 371, 756 S.E.2d at 133 ("An allegation that a party had a 'bad motive' or an 'ulterior purpose' in bringing an action, standing alone, is insufficient to sustain an abuse of process claim."); Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, 351 S.C. 65, 75 , 567 S.E.2d 251, 255-56 (Ct. App. 2002) ("One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for har	2	2
Swicegood v. Lottgreen scctapp · 2008 · cited in 3 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2010–2020 2 sentences 2020See Solanki v. Wal-Mart Store No. 2806, 410 S.C. 229, 241 , 763 S.E.2d 615, 621 (Ct. App. 2014) (addressing only the punitive damages award, but affirming an award of $50,000 in actual damages and $225,000 in punitive damages where the plaintiff spent six nights in jail after being negligently arrested); Swicegood v. Lott, 379 S.C. 346, 356 , 665 S.E.2d 211, 216 (Ct. App. 2008) (affirming an award of $150,000 on an abuse of process claim as neither "so excessive as to shock the conscience, nor the result of passion, caprice, prejudice, partiality, corruption or some other improper motives" whe 2020See Solanki v. Wal-Mart Store No. 2806, 410 S.C. 229, 241 , 763 S.E.2d 615, 621 (Ct. App. 2014) (addressing only the punitive damages award, but affirming an award of $50,000 in actual damages and $225,000 in punitive damages where the plaintiff spent six nights in jail after being negligently arrested); Swicegood v. Lott, 379 S.C. 346, 356 , 665 S.E.2d 211, 216 (Ct. App. 2008) (affirming an award of $150,000 on an abuse of process claim as neither "so excessive as to shock the conscience, nor the result of passion, caprice, prejudice, partiality, corruption or some other improper motives" whe	1	3
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co.green scctapp · 2012 · cited in 2 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2014–2018 2 sentences 2018Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co., 398 S.C. 528, 551-52 , 730 S.E.2d 340, 352 (Ct. App. 2012))); id. at 371, 756 S.E.2d at 133 ("An allegation that a party had a 'bad motive' or an 'ulterior purpose' in bringing an action, standing alone, is insufficient to sustain an abuse of process claim."); Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, 351 S.C. 65, 75 , 567 S.E.2d 251, 255-56 (Ct. App. 2002) ("One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for har 2018Horton, Inc. v. Wescott Land Co., 398 S.C. 528, 551-52 , 730 S.E.2d 340, 352 (Ct. App. 2012))); id. at 371, 756 S.E.2d at 133 ("An allegation that a party had a 'bad motive' or an 'ulterior purpose' in bringing an action, standing alone, is insufficient to sustain an abuse of process claim."); Food Lion, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers Int'l Union, 351 S.C. 65, 75 , 567 S.E.2d 251, 255-56 (Ct. App. 2002) ("One who uses a legal process, whether criminal or civil, against another primarily to accomplish a purpose for which it is not designed, is subject to liability to the other for har	1	2
Johnson v. Paintergreen sc · 1983 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026 2 sentences 2026Further, an abuse of process claim must rest on actions occurring "after its issuance." Painter, 279 S.C. at 391 , 307 S.E.2d at 860 (emphasis added). 2026Further, an abuse of process claim must rest on actions occurring "after its issuance." Painter, 279 S.C. at 391 , 307 S.E.2d at 860 (emphasis added).	1	1
Zimbelman v. Savagegreen scd · 2010 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023 1 sentence 2023See Zimbelman, 745 F. Supp. 2d at 683 ("Such things as humiliation, indignity, and mental suffering are general damages that naturally and proximately result from false imprisonment.").	1	1
Solanki v. Wal-Mart Store 2806green scctapp · 2014 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020 2 sentences 2020See Solanki v. Wal-Mart Store No. 2806, 410 S.C. 229, 241 , 763 S.E.2d 615, 621 (Ct. App. 2014) (addressing only the punitive damages award, but affirming an award of $50,000 in actual damages and $225,000 in punitive damages where the plaintiff spent six nights in jail after being negligently arrested); Swicegood v. Lott, 379 S.C. 346, 356 , 665 S.E.2d 211, 216 (Ct. App. 2008) (affirming an award of $150,000 on an abuse of process claim as neither "so excessive as to shock the conscience, nor the result of passion, caprice, prejudice, partiality, corruption or some other improper motives" whe 2020See Solanki v. Wal-Mart Store No. 2806, 410 S.C. 229, 241 , 763 S.E.2d 615, 621 (Ct. App. 2014) (addressing only the punitive damages award, but affirming an award of $50,000 in actual damages and $225,000 in punitive damages where the plaintiff spent six nights in jail after being negligently arrested); Swicegood v. Lott, 379 S.C. 346, 356 , 665 S.E.2d 211, 216 (Ct. App. 2008) (affirming an award of $150,000 on an abuse of process claim as neither "so excessive as to shock the conscience, nor the result of passion, caprice, prejudice, partiality, corruption or some other improper motives" whe	1	1
Pope v. Gordongreen sc · 2006 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014Evidence supporting the abuse of process claim: Pope v. Gordon, 369 S.C. 469, 474 , 633 S.E.2d 148, 151 (2006) (noting that in an action tried at law without a jury, the trial judge's findings of fact will not be disturbed unless the findings are wholly unsupported by the evidence or controlled by an erroneous conception of the application of the law); Hainer v. Am. 2014Evidence supporting the abuse of process claim: Pope v. Gordon, 369 S.C. 469, 474 , 633 S.E.2d 148, 151 (2006) (noting that in an action tried at law without a jury, the trial judge's findings of fact will not be disturbed unless the findings are wholly unsupported by the evidence or controlled by an erroneous conception of the application of the law); Hainer v. Am.	1	1
Argoe v. Three Rivers Behavioral Center & Psychiatric Solutionsgreen sc · 2010 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012Argoe v. Three Rivers Behavioral Ctr. & Psychiatric Solutions, 388 S.C. 394, 403 , 697 S.E.2d 551, 556 (2010). 2012Argoe v. Three Rivers Behavioral Ctr. & Psychiatric Solutions, 388 S.C. 394, 403 , 697 S.E.2d 551, 556 (2010).	1	1
Southern Glass & Plastics Co. v. Dukegreen scctapp · 2005 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012However, even assuming there is some evidence a party has an ulterior motive for bringing an action, that party is entitled to summary judgment in its favor on an abuse of process claim if there is no evidence the party engaged in a “willful act,” an element essential to the abuse of process cause of action which is characterized as a “definite act ... not authorized by the process or aimed at an object not legitimate in the use of the process.” Southern Glass & Plastics Co. v. Duke, 367 S.C. 421, 430-31, 626 S.E.2d 19, 24 (Ct.App.2005) (quoting Hainer, 328 S.C. at 136 , 492 S.E.2d at 107 ). 2012However, even assuming there is some evidence a party has an ulterior motive for bringing an action, that party is entitled to summary judgment in its favor on an abuse of process claim if there is no evidence the party engaged in a “willful act,” an element essential to the abuse of process cause of action which is characterized as a “definite act ... not authorized by the process or aimed at an object not legitimate in the use of the process.” Southern Glass & Plastics Co. v. Duke, 367 S.C. 421, 430-31, 626 S.E.2d 19, 24 (Ct.App.2005) (quoting Hainer, 328 S.C. at 136 , 492 S.E.2d at 107 ).	1	1
Law v. South Carolina Department of Correctionsgreen sc · 2006 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 2 sentences 2010Dep't of Corr., 368 S.C. 424, 441 , 629 S.E.2d 642, 651 (2006) (defining probable cause to make an arrest as "a good faith belief that a person is guilty of a crime when this belief rests on such grounds as would induce an ordinarily prudent and cautious man, under the circumstances, to believe likewise."). [7] Although the District cited in its answer several additional exceptions to the waiver of immunity under section 15-78-60, counsel raised only subsection 17 in its directed verdict motion and thus the circuit court addressed only that exception. [8] In addition to concluding that the abu 2010Dep't of Corr., 368 S.C. 424, 441 , 629 S.E.2d 642, 651 (2006) (defining probable cause to make an arrest as "a good faith belief that a person is guilty of a crime when this belief rests on such grounds as would induce an ordinarily prudent and cautious man, under the circumstances, to believe likewise."). [7] Although the District cited in its answer several additional exceptions to the waiver of immunity under section 15-78-60, counsel raised only subsection 17 in its directed verdict motion and thus the circuit court addressed only that exception. [8] In addition to concluding that the abu	1	1
Wilhoit v. WCSC, Inc.green scctapp · 1987 · cited in 1 South Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997 2 sentences 1997See Wilhoit v. WCSC, Inc., 293 S.C. 34 , 358 S.E.2d 397 (Ct.App.1987); S.C.Code Ann. § 15-33-135 (Supp.1996). [9] The Court of Appeals' opinion is modified to the extent it held there was no evidence of malice. [10] There is authority for the proposition that the focus of an abuse of process claim is on the improper use of the process after it has been issued. 1997See Wilhoit v. WCSC, Inc., 293 S.C. 34 , 358 S.E.2d 397 (Ct.App.1987); S.C.Code Ann. § 15-33-135 (Supp.1996). [9] The Court of Appeals' opinion is modified to the extent it held there was no evidence of malice. [10] There is authority for the proposition that the focus of an abuse of process claim is on the improper use of the process after it has been issued.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

Case	Cited	Years
Huggins v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc. green sc · 1967 2 sentences 2002As the court stated: "Appellant cannot divorce itself from responsibility for the proceedings that resulted from the store manager's actions . . . [as the ensuing criminal proceedings] were tainted throughout with the ulterior and improper purpose of coercing [Huggins] to pay for merchandise that the store manager `felt' or suspected he had previously taken." Huggins, 249 S.C. at 212 , 153 S.E.2d at 696 . [4] Although we acknowledge the trial court misconstrued Food Lion's amended complaint as asserting several causes of action for abuse of process rather than a single cause of action, we do n 2002As the court stated: "Appellant cannot divorce itself from responsibility for the proceedings that resulted from the store manager's actions . . . [as the ensuing criminal proceedings] were tainted throughout with the ulterior and improper purpose of coercing [Huggins] to pay for merchandise that the store manager `felt' or suspected he had previously taken." Huggins, 249 S.C. at 212 , 153 S.E.2d at 696 . [4] Although we acknowledge the trial court misconstrued Food Lion's amended complaint as asserting several causes of action for abuse of process rather than a single cause of action, we do n	2	1994–2002
Scott v. McCain green sc · 1981 2 sentences 1997Scott v. McCain, 275 S.C. 599 , 274 S.E.2d 299 (1981); Hubbard & Felix, supra at p. 384. 1997Scott v. McCain, 275 S.C. 599 , 274 S.E.2d 299 (1981); Hubbard & Felix, supra at p. 384.	2	1994–1997
McBride v. SCHOOL DIST. OF GREENVILLE green scctapp · 2010 2 sentences 2013McBride, 389 S.C. at 565 , 698 S.E.2d at 855 . 2013McBride, 389 S.C. at 565 , 698 S.E.2d at 855 .	1	2013–2013
Hainer v. American Medical International, Inc. green sc · 1997 2 sentences 2012However, even assuming there is some evidence a party has an ulterior motive for bringing an action, that party is entitled to summary judgment in its favor on an abuse of process claim if there is no evidence the party engaged in a “willful act,” an element essential to the abuse of process cause of action which is characterized as a “definite act ... not authorized by the process or aimed at an object not legitimate in the use of the process.” Southern Glass & Plastics Co. v. Duke, 367 S.C. 421, 430-31, 626 S.E.2d 19, 24 (Ct.App.2005) (quoting Hainer, 328 S.C. at 136 , 492 S.E.2d at 107 ). 2012However, even assuming there is some evidence a party has an ulterior motive for bringing an action, that party is entitled to summary judgment in its favor on an abuse of process claim if there is no evidence the party engaged in a “willful act,” an element essential to the abuse of process cause of action which is characterized as a “definite act ... not authorized by the process or aimed at an object not legitimate in the use of the process.” Southern Glass & Plastics Co. v. Duke, 367 S.C. 421, 430-31, 626 S.E.2d 19, 24 (Ct.App.2005) (quoting Hainer, 328 S.C. at 136 , 492 S.E.2d at 107 ).	1	2012–2012
Huggins v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc. green sc · 1969 2 sentences 2008Huggins v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc., 252 S.C. 353 , 166 S.E.2d 297 (1969). 2008Huggins v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc., 252 S.C. 353 , 166 S.E.2d 297 (1969).	1	2008–2008
Rycroft v. Gaddy green scctapp · 1984 2 sentences 1994Rycroft v. Gaddy, 281 S.C. 119 , 314 S.E. (2d) 39 (Ct. App. 1984); Huggins v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc., 249 S.C. 206 , 153 S.E. (2d) 693 (1967). 1994Rycroft v. Gaddy, 281 S.C. 119 , 314 S.E. (2d) 39 (Ct. App. 1984); Huggins v. Winn-Dixie Greenville, Inc., 249 S.C. 206 , 153 S.E. (2d) 693 (1967).	1	1994–1994
Broadmoor Apts. of Charleston v. Horwitz green sc · 1991 2 sentences 1994Broadmoor Apartments v. Horwitz, 306 S.C. 482 , 413 S.E. (2d) 9 (1991). 1994Broadmoor Apartments v. Horwitz, 306 S.C. 482 , 413 S.E. (2d) 9 (1991).	1	1994–1994

Statutes the citing opinions construe

SC § S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-10 (4) SC § S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-60 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

OH 53 (1994–2025) MA 51 (1986–2026) CA 44 (1986–2026) NY 25 (1986–2026) CT 22 (1991–2025) PA 20 (2001–2025) CO 20 (1986–2026) TX 19 (1993–2025) SC 17 (1994–2026) NM 17 (1987–2024) NV 16 (1986–2022) IN 16 (1994–2025) AL 15 (1981–2024) ME 15 (1984–2023) IA 14 (1982–2021) NC 13 (1986–2025) MO 12 (1993–2022) MT 12 (2000–2024) MS 10 (1999–2025) WA 10 (2008–2026) AZ 10 (1982–2024) RI 8 (1989–2010) MI 8 (1984–2024) LA 8 (1993–2024) AR 8 (1993–2021) VA 8 (1989–2021) KY 7 (2013–2024) HI 7 (1990–2024) UT 7 (2004–2025) IL 7 (1996–2023) KS 6 (1988–2021) FL 6 (1984–2025) NJ 6 (1992–2026) WI 5 (1979–2026) AK 5 (1988–2025) TN 5 (2000–2020) DE 4 (2014–2024) ND 4 (2015–2020) OR 3 (1986–2023) OK 3 (2000–2020) SD 3 (1991–2022) NH 3 (1995–2019) MN 2 (1979–2014) NE 2 (1998–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check