Legal Opinion
Langley v. Pierce
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided November 8, 1993No. 23956PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Chandler, Justice:
Pursuant to Rule 228 SCACR, the following question has been certified from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit:
Was the Statute of Repose contained in S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-545 (Supp. 1992) tolled by S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-30 (1976) when [the Defendant] Dr. Pierce moved from South Carolina in 1984?
FACTS
In 1979 and 1980, Defendant Dr. Pierce, a resident of South Carolina, removed two lesions from Plaintiffs (Langley’s) leg, which lesions he diagnosed benign. In 1984, he moved to Florida. In 1990, a third lesion removed from Langley’s leg was diagnosed…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bolick v. American Barmag Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- Browning Ex Rel. Estate of Browning v. HartvigsenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
- Knox v. AC & S, INC.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 1988
- Hoffman Ex Rel. Estate of Hoffman v. PowellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1989
- Cutino v. RamseySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Baggerly v. CSX Transportation, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
- Simmons v. SonyikaSupreme Court of Georgia · 2005
- Capco of Summerville, Inc. v. J.H. Gayle Construction Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
- Harrison v. BevilacquaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
- Butler v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, D. South Carolina · 2010
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.