17 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Watson v. Wannamakergreen2 sentences2010During oral arguments, the District relied on our Supreme Court’s opinion in Watson v. Wannamaker for the proposition that a defendant’s statement to his secretary does not constitute sufficient publication for purposes of a defamation claim. 216 S.C. 295, 296-99 , 57 S.E.2d 477, 477-78 (1950). 2010During oral arguments, the District relied on our Supreme Court’s opinion in Watson v. Wannamaker for the proposition that a defendant’s statement to his secretary does not constitute sufficient publication for purposes of a defamation claim. 216 S.C. 295, 296-99 , 57 S.E.2d 477, 477-78 (1950). | 2 | 2 |
Holtzscheiter v. Thomson Newspapers, Inc.green2 sentences2024Cf. Erickson, 368 S.C. at 465 , 629 S.E.2d at 664 ; see generally Holtzscheiter v. Thomson Newspapers, Inc., 332 S.C. 502 , 506 S.E.2d 497 (1998) (Holtzscheiter II). 2024Cf. Erickson, 368 S.C. at 465 , 629 S.E.2d at 664 ; see generally Holtzscheiter v. Thomson Newspapers, Inc., 332 S.C. 502 , 506 S.E.2d 497 (1998) (Holtzscheiter II). | 1 | 1 |
West v. Moreheadgreen2 sentences2021Assuming this was truly a policy violation, Childs's reporting on Appellant at the meeting may have been outside the scope of his representation of the District, and thus, not privileged. regardless of harm or the publication of the statement caused special harm." West v. Morehead, 396 S.C. 1, 7 , 720 S.E.2d 495, 498 (Ct. App. 2011). "[A]n important initial step in analyzing any defamation case is determining whether a particular plaintiff is a public official, public figure, or private figure." Erickson v. Jones St. 2021Assuming this was truly a policy violation, Childs's reporting on Appellant at the meeting may have been outside the scope of his representation of the District, and thus, not privileged. regardless of harm or the publication of the statement caused special harm." West v. Morehead, 396 S.C. 1, 7 , 720 S.E.2d 495, 498 (Ct. App. 2011). "[A]n important initial step in analyzing any defamation case is determining whether a particular plaintiff is a public official, public figure, or private figure." Erickson v. Jones St. | 1 | 1 |
Wallulis v. Dymowskigreen1 sentence2016Ct. App. 1984) ("We conclude that remarks communicated by one corporate employee to another concerning the job performance of a third employee are publication for the purposes of a defamation action against the employer."); Wallulis v. Dymowski, 918 P.2d 755, 760 (Or. 1996) (en banc) ("[W]e hold that a defamatory communication from one corporate employee to another corporate employee concerning the job performance of a third employee is 'published' for the purpose of a defamation claim.").2 Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's denial of Appellants' motions for directed verdict and JNOV bas | 1 | 1 |
I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. Pleasantgreen2 sentences2015Pleasant, 338 S.C. 406, 422 , 526 S.E.2d 716, 724 (2000) (holding if the losing party raised an issue to the circuit court, but the court failed to rule upon it, the party must file a Rule 59(e) motion in order to preserve the issue). 2015Pleasant, 338 S.C. 406, 422 , 526 S.E.2d 716, 724 (2000) (holding if the losing party raised an issue to the circuit court, but the court failed to rule upon it, the party must file a Rule 59(e) motion in order to preserve the issue). | 1 | 1 |
Wilder Corp. v. Wilkegreen2 sentences2015As to whether the circuit court erred in failing to consider Sheriff Hunt's alleged violation of section 17-1-40 in the context of Ferrara's defamation claim: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76 , 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue . . . must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court] to be preserved for appellate review."); I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. 2015As to whether the circuit court erred in failing to consider Sheriff Hunt's alleged violation of section 17-1-40 in the context of Ferrara's defamation claim: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76 , 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue . . . must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court] to be preserved for appellate review."); I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. | 1 | 1 |
Heard v. Johnsongreen1 sentence2013Religious bodies must be free to decide for themselves, free from state interference, matters which pertain to church government, faith, and doctrine.”); see Heard v. Johnson, 810 A.2d 871, 884-86 (D.C.2002) (rejecting a pastor’s defamation claim following his removal by the church’s trustees on the principle that the prohibition against judicial encroachment into church decisions included the employment of ministers because selection and termination of clergy is a core matter of ecclesiastical self-governance not subject to interference by a state). | 1 | 1 |
Lawrence v. Bauer Publishing & Printing Ltd.green2 sentences1998Rule 56, SCRCP; Lawrence v. Bauer Pub. & Printing Ltd., 89 N.J. 451 , 446 A.2d 469, 473 (1982) (“For the defense [of truth] to apply, however, the truth must be as broad as the defamatory imputation or ‘sting’ of the statement.”); W. 1998Rule 56, SCRCP; Lawrence v. Bauer Pub. & Printing Ltd., 89 N.J. 451 , 446 A.2d 469, 473 (1982) (“For the defense [of truth] to apply, however, the truth must be as broad as the defamatory imputation or ‘sting’ of the statement.”); W. | 1 | 1 |
Hospital Care Corp. v. Commercial Casualty Ins.green2 sentences1997Id. at 377 , 9 S.E.2d at 800 (“[W]here defamatory statements are made against an aggregate body of persons, an individual member not specifically imputed or designated cannot maintain an action.”). 1997Id. at 377 , 9 S.E.2d at 800 (“[W]here defamatory statements are made against an aggregate body of persons, an individual member not specifically imputed or designated cannot maintain an action.”). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
All Saints Parish Waccamaw v. Protestant Episcopal Church in Diocese
green
2 sentences2011Here, the Trustee's defamation claim can be resolved using solely legal principles without examining any religious questions. "[T]he neutral principles of law approach permits the application of property, corporate, and other forms of law to church disputes." All Saints Parish Waccamaw, 385 S.C. at 444 , 685 S.E.2d at 172 . 2011Here, the Trustee's defamation claim can be resolved using solely legal principles without examining any religious questions. "[T]he neutral principles of law approach permits the application of property, corporate, and other forms of law to church disputes." All Saints Parish Waccamaw, 385 S.C. at 444 , 685 S.E.2d at 172 . | 2 | 2011–2011 |
In Re Anonymous Member of the South Carolina Bar
green
2 sentences2026In support of his argument, Respondent cites In re Anonymous Member of the South Carolina Bar, 346 S.C. 177 , 552 S.E.2d 10 (2001) (addressing, for the benefit of the bench and the bar in connection with a separate, confidential disciplinary matter, the contours of appropriate conduct by attorneys in depositions and emphasizing the broad discretion afforded to trial judges to determine what constitutes improper discovery tactics). 2026In support of his argument, Respondent cites In re Anonymous Member of the South Carolina Bar, 346 S.C. 177 , 552 S.E.2d 10 (2001) (addressing, for the benefit of the bench and the bar in connection with a separate, confidential disciplinary matter, the contours of appropriate conduct by attorneys in depositions and emphasizing the broad discretion afforded to trial judges to determine what constitutes improper discovery tactics). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Erickson v. Jones Street Publishers, LLC
green
2 sentences2024Cf. Erickson, 368 S.C. at 465 , 629 S.E.2d at 664 ; see generally Holtzscheiter v. Thomson Newspapers, Inc., 332 S.C. 502 , 506 S.E.2d 497 (1998) (Holtzscheiter II). 2024Cf. Erickson, 368 S.C. at 465 , 629 S.E.2d at 664 ; see generally Holtzscheiter v. Thomson Newspapers, Inc., 332 S.C. 502 , 506 S.E.2d 497 (1998) (Holtzscheiter II). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Moosally v. WW Norton & Co., Inc.
green
2 sentences2016Comparably, Moosally involved a defamation claim brought against a source, the author, and the publisher of a book of national interest that was widely distributed in South Carolina. 358 S.C. at 320 , 594 S.E.2d at 878 . 2016Comparably, Moosally involved a defamation claim brought against a source, the author, and the publisher of a book of national interest that was widely distributed in South Carolina. 358 S.C. at 320 , 594 S.E.2d at 878 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Reverend Arcadio Natal v. The Christian and Missionary Alliance
green
1 sentence2013In my opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit’s decision in Natal v. Christian & Missionary Alliance, 878 F.2d 1575 (1st Cir.1989), is instructive. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
McMahon v. RMS Electronics, Inc.
green
2 sentences2013The court stated “although the statements regarding McMahon’s drinking habits may be relevant to his claim of wrongful termination, the resolution of the defamation claim does not require reference to the underlying contract” and “does not require an interpretation of the contractual agreement between the two parties.” Id. at 193 . 2013The court further stated “the defamation claim is not arbitrable simply because the statements' were made during the term of McMahon’s employment.” Id. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Swinton Creek Nursery v. Edisto Farm Credit
green
2 sentences2012Id. at 484 , 514 S.E.2d at 133 . 2012Id. at 484 , 514 S.E.2d at 133 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Hs Services, Inc., a California Corporation v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, an Ohio Corporation
green
1 sentence2005HS Servs., supra; Adams v. Pro Sources, supra Frank and Freedus, supra. Our holding that the exclusion does not apply to the defamation claim means that Owners must indemnify Lands Inn for the Clayton general verdict. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Adams v. Pro Sources, Inc.
green
1 sentence2005HS Servs., supra; Adams v. Pro Sources, supra Frank and Freedus, supra. Our holding that the exclusion does not apply to the defamation claim means that Owners must indemnify Lands Inn for the Clayton general verdict. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
cluster 482489
green
1 sentence1997Austin v. Torrington Co., 810 F.2d 416 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 977 , 108 S.Ct. 489 , 98 L.Ed.2d 487 (1987). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
American National Bank & Trust Co. v. City of Chicago
green
1 sentence1997Austin v. Torrington Co., 810 F.2d 416 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 977 , 108 S.Ct. 489 , 98 L.Ed.2d 487 (1987). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Coastal Corp. v. Apex Oil Co.
green
1 sentence1997Austin v. Torrington Co., 810 F.2d 416 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 977 , 108 S.Ct. 489 , 98 L.Ed.2d 487 (1987). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Maalouf v. Haddad
green
1 sentence1997Austin v. Torrington Co., 810 F.2d 416 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 977 , 108 S.Ct. 489 , 98 L.Ed.2d 487 (1987). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
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.