Legal Opinion

Ahrens v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 2, 2011No. 26966PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Toal

In 2006, this Court decided Layman v. State, 368 S.C. 631, 630 S.E.2d 265 (2006), remanding to the circuit court the issue of whether a contract existed between the South Carolina Retirement System (SCRS) and certain retirees.1 This case is an appeal from the circuit court’s decision on remand. In this case, the South Carolina Police Officers Retirement System (PORS), the SCRS, and the State of South Carolina (collectively, the State) appeal the circuit court’s order that the State is estopped from collecting retirement contributions from the certified class of “old working retirees”…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
  2. Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
  3. Pinckney v. WarrenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
  4. State v. HiottSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1981
  5. South Carolina State Highway Department v. HarbinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1955

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Hutto v. South Carolina Retirement SystemCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2014
  2. Hutto v. South Carolina Retirement SystemDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2012
  3. Bishop v. City of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2013
  4. Nutt Corp. v. Howell Road, LLCCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2011
  5. Ahrens v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API