Legal Opinion · Dissent

James v. South Carolina Department of Transportation

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided June 1, 2011No. 4835Published

1DissentFew, C.J.

I believe the circuit judge’s decision should be affirmed in accordance with the well-established rule that “[a] trial judge’s rulings on discovery matters will not be disturbed by an appellate court absent a clear abuse of discretion.” Hollman v. Woolfson, 384 S.C. 571, 577, 683 S.E.2d 495, 498 (2009); see also Arthur v. Sexton Dental Clinic, 368 S.C. 326, 333, 628 S.E.2d 894, 898 (Ct.App.2006). In my opinion, the circuit judge committed no error of law, and his ruling is supported by the facts. He therefore ruled within his discretion. Arthur, 368 S.C. at 333, 628 S.E.2d at 898 (“An abuse…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hollman v. WoolfsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2009
  2. Arthur v. Sexton Dental Clinic Ex Rel. EagertonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API