Legal Opinion

Whitner v. Duke Power Company

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided February 24, 1982No. 21649PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ness, Justice:

This is a malicious prosecution action. Appellant, Whitner, alleges respondent, Duke Power, maliciously prosecuted him on a charge of simple possession of marijuana, and asserts the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Duke. We disagree and affirm.

Appellant was arrested for simple possession by company security officers while employed by Duke Power. Security officers observed him in the passenger seat of John Brunfield’s car (a co-worker) and found marijuana in the glove compartment, on the floor board, and in Brunfield’s hand.

Brunfield and another Duke employee,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Murphy v. HaganSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1980
  2. Kinton v. Mobile Home Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1980
  3. Truett v. GeorgesonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1979

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Frankie L. Barber v. Whirlpool CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
  2. Deaton v. LeathSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983
  3. Germann Ex Rel. Estate of Germann v. New York Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
  4. Deaton v. LeathSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API