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.
17 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1962–2026 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Clark v. SC DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETYgreen2 sentences2020"The burden of establishing an exception to the waiver of immunity is on the governmental entity asserting the [exception as a] defense." Clark, 362 S.C. at 386 , 608 S.E.2d at 578 . 5 In its reply brief, the Estate abandoned its argument on the third issue, stating, "[The Estate] concedes there is no path forward on this theory of liability." 6 "[The Act] is the exclusive civil remedy available for any tort committed by a governmental entity, its employees, or its agents"; however, "[n]othing in this chapter may be construed to give an employee of a governmental entity immunity from suit and 2020"The burden of establishing an exception to the waiver of immunity is on the governmental entity asserting the [exception as a] defense." Clark, 362 S.C. at 386 , 608 S.E.2d at 578 . 5 In its reply brief, the Estate abandoned its argument on the third issue, stating, "[The Estate] concedes there is no path forward on this theory of liability." 6 "[The Act] is the exclusive civil remedy available for any tort committed by a governmental entity, its employees, or its agents"; however, "[n]othing in this chapter may be construed to give an employee of a governmental entity immunity from suit and | 2 | 3 |
Deck v. Missourigreen2 sentences2023"To show prejudice, the applicant must show that, but for counsel's errors, there is a reasonable probability the result of trial would have been 7 In Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622 (2005), the Supreme Court held if a defendant is visibly shackled during trial, the State bears the burden of establishing the error was harmless. 2023"To show prejudice, the applicant must show that, but for counsel's errors, there is a reasonable probability the result of trial would have been 7 In Deck v. Missouri, 544 U.S. 622 (2005), the Supreme Court held if a defendant is visibly shackled during trial, the State bears the burden of establishing the error was harmless. | 2 | 2 |
Brown v. Fingergreen2 sentences2023Brown v. Finger, 240 S.C. 102, 113 , 124 S.E.2d 781, 786 (1962) ("The burden of establishing the bar of the statute of limitations rests upon the one interposing it…and where the testimony is conflicting upon the question, it becomes an issue for the jury to decide.") (internal citations omitted). 2023Brown v. Finger, 240 S.C. 102, 113 , 124 S.E.2d 781, 786 (1962) ("The burden of establishing the bar of the statute of limitations rests upon the one interposing it…and where the testimony is conflicting upon the question, it becomes an issue for the jury to decide.") (internal citations omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Bandy v. Bandygreen2 sentences2009See Bandy v. Bandy, 187 S.C. 410, 413 , 197 S.E. 396, 397 (1938) (holding the burden was on defendant in mortgage foreclosure suit to establish her defense that mortgage and note secured thereby were without valuable consideration by preponderance of evidence). 2009See Bandy v. Bandy, 187 S.C. 410, 413 , 197 S.E. 396, 397 (1938) (holding the burden was on defendant in mortgage foreclosure suit to establish her defense that mortgage and note secured thereby were without valuable consideration by preponderance of evidence). | 2 | 2 |
US BANK TRUST NAT. ASS'N v. Bellgreen2 sentences2016Ass'n v. Bell, 385 S.C. 364 , 374-75, 684 S.E.2d 199 , 205 (Ct. App. 2009) ("Generally, the party seeking foreclosure has the burden of establishing the existence of the debt and the mortgagor's default on that debt."); id. at 375, 684 S.E.2d at 205 ("Once the debt and default have been established, the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction."). 2016Ass'n v. Bell, 385 S.C. 364 , 374-75, 684 S.E.2d 199 , 205 (Ct. App. 2009) ("Generally, the party seeking foreclosure has the burden of establishing the existence of the debt and the mortgagor's default on that debt."); id. at 375, 684 S.E.2d at 205 ("Once the debt and default have been established, the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction."). | 1 | 2 |
Lorick & Lowrance, Inc. v. Julius H. Walker & Co.green2 sentences2006Walker & Co. , 153 S.C. 309, 318 , 150 S.E. 789, 792 (1929); see also 61A Am. 2006Walker & Co. , 153 S.C. 309, 318 , 150 S.E. 789, 792 (1929); see also 61A Am. | 1 | 1 |
Faile v. South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justicegreen2 sentences2004Faile v. South Carolina Dept of Juvenile Justice , 350 S.C. 315, 324 , 566 S.E.2d 536, 540 (2002). 2004Faile v. South Carolina Dept of Juvenile Justice , 350 S.C. 315, 324 , 566 S.E.2d 536, 540 (2002). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lewis v. Lewis
green
2 sentences2026Lewis, 392 S.C. at 389 , 709 S.E.2d at 654 . 2026Lewis, 392 S.C. at 389 , 709 S.E.2d at 654 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
North Carolina Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. DAV Corp.
green
2 sentences2021Once the debt and default have been established, 7 See DAV Corp., 298 S.C. at 518 , 381 S.E.2d at 905 ; BADD, L.L.C., 414 S.C. at 296 , 778 S.E.2d at 109 ; Salon Proz, LLC, 420 S.C. at 97-98 , 800 S.E.2d at 492 . the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction." (footnote omitted)). 2021Once the debt and default have been established, 7 See DAV Corp., 298 S.C. at 518 , 381 S.E.2d at 905 ; BADD, L.L.C., 414 S.C. at 296 , 778 S.E.2d at 109 ; Salon Proz, LLC, 420 S.C. at 97-98 , 800 S.E.2d at 492 . the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction." (footnote omitted)). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
South Carolina Community Bank v. Salon Proz, LLC
green
2 sentences2021Once the debt and default have been established, 7 See DAV Corp., 298 S.C. at 518 , 381 S.E.2d at 905 ; BADD, L.L.C., 414 S.C. at 296 , 778 S.E.2d at 109 ; Salon Proz, LLC, 420 S.C. at 97-98 , 800 S.E.2d at 492 . the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction." (footnote omitted)). 2021Once the debt and default have been established, 7 See DAV Corp., 298 S.C. at 518 , 381 S.E.2d at 905 ; BADD, L.L.C., 414 S.C. at 296 , 778 S.E.2d at 109 ; Salon Proz, LLC, 420 S.C. at 97-98 , 800 S.E.2d at 492 . the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction." (footnote omitted)). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Carolina First Bank v. BADD, L.L.C.
green
2 sentences2021Once the debt and default have been established, 7 See DAV Corp., 298 S.C. at 518 , 381 S.E.2d at 905 ; BADD, L.L.C., 414 S.C. at 296 , 778 S.E.2d at 109 ; Salon Proz, LLC, 420 S.C. at 97-98 , 800 S.E.2d at 492 . the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction." (footnote omitted)). 2021Once the debt and default have been established, 7 See DAV Corp., 298 S.C. at 518 , 381 S.E.2d at 905 ; BADD, L.L.C., 414 S.C. at 296 , 778 S.E.2d at 109 ; Salon Proz, LLC, 420 S.C. at 97-98 , 800 S.E.2d at 492 . the mortgagor has the burden of establishing a defense to foreclosure such as lack of consideration, payment, or accord and satisfaction." (footnote omitted)). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Wilson v. Preston
green
2 sentences2019"In general, the burden of establishing the privilege rests upon the party asserting it." Wilson v. Preston , 378 S.C. 348 , 359, 662 S.E.2d 580 , 585 (2008). 2019"In general, the burden of establishing the privilege rests upon the party asserting it." Wilson v. Preston , 378 S.C. 348 , 359, 662 S.E.2d 580 , 585 (2008). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Moore v. Smith
green
1 sentence1962The cause of action accrued when the services and companionship of the wife were lost and, under the allegations in this action, such were not lost until the wife became addicted to the use of narcotic drugs. *113 The burden of establishing the bar of the statute of limitations rests upon the one interposing it, Moore v. Smith, 29 S. C. 254, 7 S. E. 485 , and where the testimony is conflicting upon the question, it becomes an. issue for the jury to decide, Latimer v. Trowbridge, 52 S. C. 193, 29 S. E. 634 ; Worth v. Norton, 60 S. C. 293, 38 S. E. 605 . | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Latimer v. Trowbridge
neutral
1 sentence1962The cause of action accrued when the services and companionship of the wife were lost and, under the allegations in this action, such were not lost until the wife became addicted to the use of narcotic drugs. *113 The burden of establishing the bar of the statute of limitations rests upon the one interposing it, Moore v. Smith, 29 S. C. 254, 7 S. E. 485 , and where the testimony is conflicting upon the question, it becomes an. issue for the jury to decide, Latimer v. Trowbridge, 52 S. C. 193, 29 S. E. 634 ; Worth v. Norton, 60 S. C. 293, 38 S. E. 605 . | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Worth v. Norton
green
1 sentence1962The cause of action accrued when the services and companionship of the wife were lost and, under the allegations in this action, such were not lost until the wife became addicted to the use of narcotic drugs. *113 The burden of establishing the bar of the statute of limitations rests upon the one interposing it, Moore v. Smith, 29 S. C. 254, 7 S. E. 485 , and where the testimony is conflicting upon the question, it becomes an. issue for the jury to decide, Latimer v. Trowbridge, 52 S. C. 193, 29 S. E. 634 ; Worth v. Norton, 60 S. C. 293, 38 S. E. 605 . | 1 | 1962–1962 |
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.