Legal Opinion
Bishop v. City of Columbia
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Decided January 23, 2013No. Appellate Case No. 2010-176227; No. 5077PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
On appeal, Basilides F. Cruz, Joseph A. Floyd, Sr., Arthur C. Gillam, III, Alma C. Hill, Barry N. Martin, Charles F. Morris, and Joseph A. Smith (collectively, Retirees) claim the circuit court erred in granting the City of Columbia’s (the City) motion for summary judgment on Retirees’ claims for continuing free health insurance under claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and equitable estoppel. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
FACTS/PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Retirees are a group of retired firefighters and police officers who each worked at least twenty years for the City of…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
- Hancock v. Mid-South Management Co., Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2009
- David v. McLeod Regional Medical CenterSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
- Prescott v. Farmers Telephone Cooperative, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
- Davis v. Greenwood School District 50Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Basilides Cruz v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2024
- Basilides Cruz v. City of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2022
- Count v. Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, AmericaDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2021
- Cranfill v. SC Home Builders Self Insurers FundDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2025
- Crenshaw v. Erskine CollegeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.