Legal Opinion

Huntley v. Young

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided September 18, 1995No. 24319PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Per curiam

This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP, motion to dismiss all nine causes of action alleged in respondents’ complaint. Although generally the denial of Rule 12(b)(6) motion is not directly appealable, we have allowed an appeal in cases such as this where the issue is whether a claim is properly asserted as a direct action or as a shareholder’s derivative action. Compare Moyd v. Johnson, 289 S.C. 482, 347 S.E. (2d) 97 (1986) with Hite v. Thomas & Howard Co., 305 S.C. 358, 409 S.E. (2d) 340 (1991). We now reconsider Hite, and overrule it to the extent it holds…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hite v. Thomas & Howard Co. of Florence, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  2. McLendon v. South Carolina Department of Highways & Public TransportationSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
  3. Moyd v. JohnsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1986

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Brown Ex Rel. Estate of Brown v. StewartCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2001
  2. Ferguson v. Charleston Lincoln Mercury, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  3. Matthew Burgess v. Lamoille Housing Partnership, Town of Morristown, Mary Ann Wilson as Collector of Taxes and Sharon Green, Esq.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2016
  4. Kiriakides v. Atlas Food Systems & Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2000
  5. Watson v. UnderwoodCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2014

12 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