Legal Opinion · Dissent

Thompson v. Hofmann

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided December 4, 1974No. 19918Published

1DissentMoss, Chief Justice

(dissenting) :

I am not in accord with the majority opinion in this case and feel compelled to dissent.

Dorothy M. Thompson, the respondent herein, instituted this action against Carol Hofmann, the appellant herein, for damages allegedly sustained by her as a result of the alienation of the affections of her husband by the appellant. It appears from the complaint that the appellant is a resident and citizen of the State of New Jersey.

The service of the Summons and Complaint was made upon the appellant under Code Section 10.2-806(1) (c), which provides as follows:

“(1) When the law of this State…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance v. South Carolina Tax CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1958
  2. Fennell v. LittlejohnSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1962
  3. Crouch v. BenetSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1941
  4. Tention v. Southern Pacific Railroad CompanyDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1972
  5. McGee v. Holan Division of Ohio Brass CompanyDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1972

1 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