Legal Opinion
Stanley v. Kirkpatrick
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided January 12, 2004No. 25769PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Justice MOORE:
Respondent commenced a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 1 action against petitioner (the City) alleging the City had a policy or custom of attempting to oppress and financially hobble her. We granted certiorari to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred by reversing the trial court’s order granting the City summary judgment and denying respondent’s motion to amend her complaint. Stanley v. Kirkpatrick, 2001-UP-016 (S.C. Ct.App. refiled October 3, 2001). We affirm in part and reverse in part.
FACTS
Respondent bred Shar-Pei dogs at her Columbia home. Due to the complaints of neighbors, the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Board of the County Commissioners of Bryan County v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Pembaur v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Jett v. Dallas Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Tanner v. Florence County TreasurerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
- Thomas v. GraysonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Parker v. Spartanburg Sanitary Sewer DistrictCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2005
- McCoy v. City of ColumbiaDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2013
- Patton ex rel. Alexia L. v. MillerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2017
- Bishop v. City of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2013
- TIGER v. PAWS ANIMAL ADOPTION CENTERDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2025