Legal Opinion

Lemoine v. Hollingsworth

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided August 1, 1979No. 21019PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

This appeal is from the order denying appellants’ motion for a judgment n. o. v. or, in the alternative, for a new trial nisi. We affirm.

Respondents Lemoine initiated this breach of implied warranty action alleging the house they purchased from appellants Hollingsworth was defective. After a jury returned a verdict in respondents’ favor for $8,375.00, appellants moved for a judgment n. o. v. or for a new trial nisi. Appellants raise two questions on appeal from the denial of their motions.

Initially, appellants contend the $8,375.00 verdict was excessive and unsupported by the evidence.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Buzhardt v. CromerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1978
  2. Carolina Power & Light Co. v. GasqueSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1972

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Higgins Construction Co. v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1981
  2. Starkey v. BellCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1984
  3. McPeters v. Yeargin Const. Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API