unclean hands precludes a plaintiff doctrine in South Carolina

2025See Straight v. Goss, 383 S.C. 180, 206 , 678 S.E.2d 443, 457 (Ct. App. 2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting First Union Nat'l Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 568 , 511 S.E.2d 372, 379 (Ct. App. 1998))); id. at 207, 678 S.E.2d at 457-58 ("He who comes into equity must come with clean hands.

2025See Straight v. Goss, 383 S.C. 180, 206 , 678 S.E.2d 443, 457 (Ct. App. 2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting First Union Nat'l Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 568 , 511 S.E.2d 372, 379 (Ct. App. 1998))); id. at 207, 678 S.E.2d at 457-58 ("He who comes into equity must come with clean hands.

2021See Emery v. Smith, 361 S.C. 207 , 220–21, 603 S.E.2d 598, 605 (Ct. App. 2004) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting Wilson v. Landstrom, 281 S.C. 260, 267 , 315 S.E.2d 130, 134 (Ct. App. 1984))).

2021See Emery v. Smith, 361 S.C. 207 , 220–21, 603 S.E.2d 598, 605 (Ct. App. 2004) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting Wilson v. Landstrom, 281 S.C. 260, 267 , 315 S.E.2d 130, 134 (Ct. App. 1984))).

2021See Emery v. Smith, 361 S.C. 207 , 220–21, 603 S.E.2d 598, 605 (Ct. App. 2004) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting Wilson v. Landstrom, 281 S.C. 260, 267 , 315 S.E.2d 130, 134 (Ct. App. 1984))).

2021See Emery v. Smith, 361 S.C. 207 , 220–21, 603 S.E.2d 598, 605 (Ct. App. 2004) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting Wilson v. Landstrom, 281 S.C. 260, 267 , 315 S.E.2d 130, 134 (Ct. App. 1984))).

2025See Straight v. Goss, 383 S.C. 180, 206 , 678 S.E.2d 443, 457 (Ct. App. 2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting First Union Nat'l Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 568 , 511 S.E.2d 372, 379 (Ct. App. 1998))); id. at 207, 678 S.E.2d at 457-58 ("He who comes into equity must come with clean hands.

2025See Straight v. Goss, 383 S.C. 180, 206 , 678 S.E.2d 443, 457 (Ct. App. 2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (quoting First Union Nat'l Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 568 , 511 S.E.2d 372, 379 (Ct. App. 1998))); id. at 207, 678 S.E.2d at 457-58 ("He who comes into equity must come with clean hands.

2022Cleckley & Co., 325 S.C. 327, 350 , 479 S.E.2d 67, 78 (Ct. App. 1996) ("An appellant seeking reversal must show error and prejudice.").

2022Cleckley & Co., 325 S.C. 327, 350 , 479 S.E.2d 67, 78 (Ct. App. 1996) ("An appellant seeking reversal must show error and prejudice.").

2019See Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76 , 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review."); First Union Nat'l Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 568 , 511 S.E.2d 372, 379 (Ct. App. 1998) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (emphasis added)). 4.

2019See Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76 , 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review."); First Union Nat'l Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 568 , 511 S.E.2d 372, 379 (Ct. App. 1998) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant." (emphasis added)). 4.

2010Brown Amusement Co. , 360 S.C. 366, 371 , 601 S.E.2d 342, 345 (2004) ("When a contract is originally legal, but performance becomes illegal due to a change in the law, any subsequent performance is against public policy and the party who has agreed to perform is excused from doing so."); Jackson v. Bi-Lo Stores, Inc. , 313 S.C. 272, 276 , 437 S.E.2d 168, 170 (Ct. App. 1993) ("It is a well founded policy of law that no person be permitted to acquire a right of action from their own unlawful act and one who participates in an unlawful act cannot recover damages for the consequence of that act.

2010Brown Amusement Co. , 360 S.C. 366, 371 , 601 S.E.2d 342, 345 (2004) ("When a contract is originally legal, but performance becomes illegal due to a change in the law, any subsequent performance is against public policy and the party who has agreed to perform is excused from doing so."); Jackson v. Bi-Lo Stores, Inc. , 313 S.C. 272, 276 , 437 S.E.2d 168, 170 (Ct. App. 1993) ("It is a well founded policy of law that no person be permitted to acquire a right of action from their own unlawful act and one who participates in an unlawful act cannot recover damages for the consequence of that act.

2010Comm'n , 373 S.C. 153, 163-64 , 644 S.E.2d 710, 716 (2007) (upholding a cease and desist order finding TLA[1] and Majors in violation of § 35-1-810 for failing to register its investment contracts); Aaron v. Mahl , 381 S.C. 585, 594 , 674 S.E.2d 482, 487 (2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant.") (internal quotation omitted); White v. J.M.

2010Comm'n , 373 S.C. 153, 163-64 , 644 S.E.2d 710, 716 (2007) (upholding a cease and desist order finding TLA[1] and Majors in violation of § 35-1-810 for failing to register its investment contracts); Aaron v. Mahl , 381 S.C. 585, 594 , 674 S.E.2d 482, 487 (2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant.") (internal quotation omitted); White v. J.M.

2010Comm'n , 373 S.C. 153, 163-64 , 644 S.E.2d 710, 716 (2007) (upholding a cease and desist order finding TLA[1] and Majors in violation of § 35-1-810 for failing to register its investment contracts); Aaron v. Mahl , 381 S.C. 585, 594 , 674 S.E.2d 482, 487 (2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant.") (internal quotation omitted); White v. J.M.

2010Comm'n , 373 S.C. 153, 163-64 , 644 S.E.2d 710, 716 (2007) (upholding a cease and desist order finding TLA[1] and Majors in violation of § 35-1-810 for failing to register its investment contracts); Aaron v. Mahl , 381 S.C. 585, 594 , 674 S.E.2d 482, 487 (2009) ("The doctrine of unclean hands precludes a plaintiff from recovering in equity if he acted unfairly in a matter that is the subject of the litigation to the prejudice of the defendant.") (internal quotation omitted); White v. J.M.

2010Brown Amusement Co. , 360 S.C. 366, 371 , 601 S.E.2d 342, 345 (2004) ("When a contract is originally legal, but performance becomes illegal due to a change in the law, any subsequent performance is against public policy and the party who has agreed to perform is excused from doing so."); Jackson v. Bi-Lo Stores, Inc. , 313 S.C. 272, 276 , 437 S.E.2d 168, 170 (Ct. App. 1993) ("It is a well founded policy of law that no person be permitted to acquire a right of action from their own unlawful act and one who participates in an unlawful act cannot recover damages for the consequence of that act.

2010Brown Amusement Co. , 360 S.C. 366, 371 , 601 S.E.2d 342, 345 (2004) ("When a contract is originally legal, but performance becomes illegal due to a change in the law, any subsequent performance is against public policy and the party who has agreed to perform is excused from doing so."); Jackson v. Bi-Lo Stores, Inc. , 313 S.C. 272, 276 , 437 S.E.2d 168, 170 (Ct. App. 1993) ("It is a well founded policy of law that no person be permitted to acquire a right of action from their own unlawful act and one who participates in an unlawful act cannot recover damages for the consequence of that act.

2010“The expression ‘clean hands’ means a clean record with respect to the transaction with the defendants themselves and not with respect to others.” Arnold v. City of Spartanburg, 201 S.C. 523, 532 , 23 S.E.2d 735, 738 (1943).

2010“The expression ‘clean hands’ means a clean record with respect to the transaction with the defendants themselves and not with respect to others.” Arnold v. City of Spartanburg, 201 S.C. 523, 532 , 23 S.E.2d 735, 738 (1943).