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.
7 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2009–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Shirley's Iron Works, Inc. v. City of Uniongreen2 sentences2018See Shirley's Iron Works, Inc. v. City of Union , 403 S.C. 560 , 573, 743 S.E.2d 778 , 785 (2013) ("An unappealed ruling is the law of the case and requires affirmance."). 2018See Shirley's Iron Works, Inc. v. City of Union , 403 S.C. 560 , 573, 743 S.E.2d 778 , 785 (2013) ("An unappealed ruling is the law of the case and requires affirmance."). | 1 | 1 |
Caprara v. Chrysler Corp.green2 sentences2014See Caprara v. Chrysler Corp., 52 N.Y.2d 114 , 436 N.Y.S.2d 251 , 417 N.E.2d 545, 549 (1981) (stating that, in a products liability claim predicated on negligence, the central inquiry is whether there is “affirmative conduct in creating a dangerous condition or a failure to perceive a foreseeable risk and take reasonable steps to avert its consequences”); 72A C.J.S. 2014See Caprara v. Chrysler Corp., 52 N.Y.2d 114 , 436 N.Y.S.2d 251 , 417 N.E.2d 545, 549 (1981) (stating that, in a products liability claim predicated on negligence, the central inquiry is whether there is “affirmative conduct in creating a dangerous condition or a failure to perceive a foreseeable risk and take reasonable steps to avert its consequences”); 72A C.J.S. | 1 | 1 |
Livingston v. Noland Corp.green2 sentences2013See Livingston v. Noland Corp., 293 S.C. 521, 525 , 362 S.E.2d 16, 18 (1987) (reciting the elements of a negligent failure-to-warn claim in products liability (citing Gardner v. Q.H.S., Inc., 448 F.2d 238, 242 (4th Cir.1971) (applying South Carolina law and relying on section 388))). 5 On any negligence claim, including one for products liability, the plaintiff must prove the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care. 2013See Livingston v. Noland Corp., 293 S.C. 521, 525 , 362 S.E.2d 16, 18 (1987) (reciting the elements of a negligent failure-to-warn claim in products liability (citing Gardner v. Q.H.S., Inc., 448 F.2d 238, 242 (4th Cir.1971) (applying South Carolina law and relying on section 388))). 5 On any negligence claim, including one for products liability, the plaintiff must prove the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care. | 1 | 1 |
James C. Gardner v. Q. H. S., Inc., a Corporation, and J. M. Fields, Inc., a Corporationgreen1 sentence2013See Livingston v. Noland Corp., 293 S.C. 521, 525 , 362 S.E.2d 16, 18 (1987) (reciting the elements of a negligent failure-to-warn claim in products liability (citing Gardner v. Q.H.S., Inc., 448 F.2d 238, 242 (4th Cir.1971) (applying South Carolina law and relying on section 388))). 5 On any negligence claim, including one for products liability, the plaintiff must prove the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care. | 1 | 1 |
Laurens Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Altec Industries, Inc.green1 sentence2009See Laurens Electric Cooperative v. Altec Industries, 889 F.2d 1323 (4th Cir.1989) (prohibiting a products liability claim where the only injury sustained was to the product itself); 2000 Watermark Ass’n v. Celotex Corp., 784 F.2d 1183 (4th Cir.1986) (prohibiting a tort claim against a defendant who negligently installed defective shingles pursuant to our economic loss rule); Purvis v. Consolidated Energy Products Co., 674 F.2d 217 (4th Cir.1982) (holding under South Carolina's economic loss rule, a tobacco farmer could not maintain an action against a barn manufacturer because his only injury | 1 | 1 |
Palmetto Linen Service, Incorporated v. U.N.X., Incorporated Nova Controls, Incorporatedgreen1 sentence2009See Palmetto Linen Service, Inc. v. U.N.X., Inc., 205 F.3d 126 (4th Cir.2000) (upholding the dismissal of plaintiff’s negligence claim pursuant to South Carolina’s economic loss rule where defendant's chemical dispensing system harmed only plaintiff's linens because the destruction of the linens was a “natural and foreseeable result of a malfunction" and the parties contemplated this allocation of risk in their contract); Myrtle Beach Pipeline Corp. v. Emerson Elec. | 1 | 1 |
Rife v. Hitachi Const. MacHinery Co., Ltd.green2 sentences2009Rife, 363 S.C. at 215 , 609 S.E.2d at 569 (citations omitted). 2009Rife, 363 S.C. at 215 , 609 S.E.2d at 569 (citations omitted). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bragg v. Hi-Ranger, Inc.
green
2 sentences2021The simple fact Hazel's claim is—or is not—a products liability claim does not answer this question.10 10 We do not argue, as the dissent suggests, "that the Old Republic Insurance Company policy" provides no coverage for Hazel's claim "because the parties call it To support its argument, Fred's relies heavily on Bragg v. Hi-Ranger, Inc., 319 S.C. 531 , 462 S.E.2d 321 (Ct. App. 1995). 2021The simple fact Hazel's claim is—or is not—a products liability claim does not answer this question.10 10 We do not argue, as the dissent suggests, "that the Old Republic Insurance Company policy" provides no coverage for Hazel's claim "because the parties call it To support its argument, Fred's relies heavily on Bragg v. Hi-Ranger, Inc., 319 S.C. 531 , 462 S.E.2d 321 (Ct. App. 1995). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Geier v. American Honda Motor Co.
green
2 sentences2012As was true with virtually all passenger vehicles manufactured at the time, 2 Respondent utilized tempered glass in vehicle side windows. 3 In connection with implied conflict preemption, Williamson revisited the Supreme Court’s decision in Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 , 120 S.Ct. 1913 , 146 L.Ed.2d 914 (2000). 2012As was true with virtually all passenger vehicles manufactured at the time, 2 Respondent utilized tempered glass in vehicle side windows. 3 In connection with implied conflict preemption, Williamson revisited the Supreme Court’s decision in Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 , 120 S.Ct. 1913 , 146 L.Ed.2d 914 (2000). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Preston B. Purvis v. Consolidated Energy Products Company, a Division of Condec Corporation
green
1 sentence2009See Laurens Electric Cooperative v. Altec Industries, 889 F.2d 1323 (4th Cir.1989) (prohibiting a products liability claim where the only injury sustained was to the product itself); 2000 Watermark Ass’n v. Celotex Corp., 784 F.2d 1183 (4th Cir.1986) (prohibiting a tort claim against a defendant who negligently installed defective shingles pursuant to our economic loss rule); Purvis v. Consolidated Energy Products Co., 674 F.2d 217 (4th Cir.1982) (holding under South Carolina's economic loss rule, a tobacco farmer could not maintain an action against a barn manufacturer because his only injury | 1 | 2009–2009 |
2000 Watermark Association, Inc. v. The Celotex Corporation
green
1 sentence2009See Laurens Electric Cooperative v. Altec Industries, 889 F.2d 1323 (4th Cir.1989) (prohibiting a products liability claim where the only injury sustained was to the product itself); 2000 Watermark Ass’n v. Celotex Corp., 784 F.2d 1183 (4th Cir.1986) (prohibiting a tort claim against a defendant who negligently installed defective shingles pursuant to our economic loss rule); Purvis v. Consolidated Energy Products Co., 674 F.2d 217 (4th Cir.1982) (holding under South Carolina's economic loss rule, a tobacco farmer could not maintain an action against a barn manufacturer because his only injury | 1 | 2009–2009 |
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.