adversarial hearing (South Carolina) · Go Syfert
← South Carolina issues

adversarial hearing in South Carolina

6 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2011 0 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 (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Carolina.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Snipes v. McAndrew green
sc · 1984
2 sentences

1995In Snipes v. McAndrew, 280 S.C. 320 , 313 S.E.2d 294 (1984), a case concerning the reassignment of two principals to assistant principal positions, the court expressly held that "teachers" who have been transferred, reassigned, or demoted are not entitled to an adversarial hearing because entitlement to such a hearing is dependent upon dismissal or nonrenewal.

1995In Snipes v. McAndrew, 280 S.C. 320 , 313 S.E.2d 294 (1984), a case concerning the reassignment of two principals to assistant principal positions, the court expressly held that "teachers" who have been transferred, reassigned, or demoted are not entitled to an adversarial hearing because entitlement to such a hearing is dependent upon dismissal or nonrenewal.

31994–1995
Goss v. Lopez green
scotus · 1975
2 sentences

2011Id. at 581 , 95 S.Ct. at 740 .

2011Id. at 581 , 95 S.Ct. at 740 .

12011–2011
Nance v. Ozmint green
sc · 2006
2 sentences

2011Nance , at 557-558, 626 S.E.2d at 883 .

2011Nance, at 557-558, 626 S.E.2d at 883 . *300 I would find no abuse of discretion in the suppression of Mr. Fraley's trial testimony, State v. Wright, supra , and would therefore affirm.

12011–2011
Mathews v. Eldridge green
scotus · 1976
2 sentences

1998In Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976), the Supreme Court articulated three identifiable factors for assessing the constitutional requirements of due process.

1998In Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976), the Supreme Court articulated three identifiable factors for assessing the constitutional requirements of due process.

11998–1998

Statutes the citing opinions construe

SC § S.C. Code Ann. § 59-25-410 (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

IL 48 (1980–2025) TX 45 (1990–2024) NY 40 (1976–2026) FL 36 (1985–2025) CA 25 (1981–2025) WA 25 (1994–2024) MS 18 (1990–2022) NJ 13 (1983–2022) CT 13 (1987–2016) MO 13 (1994–2019) IN 12 (1985–2018) KY 12 (2000–2026) NM 11 (1995–2024) PA 11 (1980–2025) OH 9 (1989–2020) OR 8 (1981–2023) MD 7 (1984–2025) MI 7 (1989–2018) KS 7 (1991–2015) AL 7 (1989–2004) CO 7 (1989–2011) NV 7 (1984–2020) NC 6 (1990–2026) LA 6 (1986–2017) SC 6 (1994–2011) TN 6 (1995–2015) GA 6 (1970–2025) DC 5 (1992–2016) AK 5 (1995–2025) AZ 5 (1984–2018) IA 4 (2002–2023) VT 4 (1994–2022) MN 4 (1989–2017) OK 3 (1990–2013) AR 3 (2004–2019) SD 3 (1996–1996) MT 2 (1998–2025) NE 2 (1998–2017) WV 2 (1980–2002) DE 2 (2020–2021)

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