Legal Opinion
Eubanks v. Smith
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided April 6, 1987No. 22694PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Gregory, Justice:
Respondents commenced these actions seeking damages for alleged violations of their procedural due process rights and for libel. We reverse in part and affirm in part.
Respondents are former employees of the City of Myrtle Beach. Respondent Wiggins served as Director of the Building Department. Respondents Eubanks and Casey were employed respectively as electrical inspector and plumbing inspector for the Building Department. In November 1982, Casey reported to Wiggins that he suspected certain plumbers had received trade cards from the Department without being qualified. Upon…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Wisconsin v. ConstantineauSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Bell v. Bank of AbbevilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1946
- Stevens v. Sun NewsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1982
- Richardson v. McGillSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1979
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Murray, v. Holnam, Inc. and Thomas Thornton, of Whom Holnam, Inc. IsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2001
- Salazar v. Morales, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)1995
- Maxine B. Cooper v. Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, Incorporated, and Esab Group, Incorporated Roche Biomedical Laboratories, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998
- Thomas & Howard Co. v. TW Graham and Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
- Wright v. SparrowCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.