Legal Opinion
DOE BY ROE v. Orangeburg Cty. Sch. Dist.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Decided December 8, 1997No. 2765PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
329 S.C. 221 (1997)
495 S.E.2d 230
Jane DOE, by her Guardian ad Litem, Mary ROE, and Mary Roe, individually, Respondents-Appellants,
v.
ORANGEBURG COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 2, Appellant-Respondent.
No. 2765.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina.
Heard October 8, 1997.
Decided December 8, 1997
Rehearing Denied January 23, 1998.
Preston F. McDaniel, Columbia, and Clyde C. Dean, Jr., Orangeburg, for respondents-appellants.
William E. Craver, III, and Bruce E. Davis, both of Davis, Craver, Hagood & Kerr, Charleston, for appellant-respondent.
HEARN, Judge:
In this action for negligent supervision, Orangeburg…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Angela Berry v. William DeloneyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Clyburn v. Sumter County School District 17Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
- Hollins Ex Rel. Hollins v. Richland County School District OneSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
- DOE BY DOE v. Greenville Hosp. SystemCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1994
- Barnes v. BarnesIndiana Supreme Court · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sonia F. v. Eighth Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 2009
- L.E. AND P.T. VS. THE PLAINFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT VS. A.D. AND R.B. (L-2513-15, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2018