Legal Opinion

Chewning v. Ford Motor Co.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided June 4, 2001No. 3351PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEARN, Chief Judge:

Ray H. Chewning, Jr. filed this action in equity for fraud and for fraud upon the court against Ford Motor Company (Ford), David Bickerstaff, and David Bickerstaff and Associates, Incorporated (collectively, Defendants), to set aside a judgment in an earlier products liability case. The circuit court granted Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings, concluding the complaint alleged intrinsic fraud which cannot serve as the basis for vacating a judgment after more than one year. As an additional sustaining ground, the court held Chewning failed to plead fraud with…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Baird v. Charleston CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
  3. Cleveland Demolition Co. v. Azcon Scrap Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1987
  4. Hilton Head Center of South Carolina, Inc. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  5. Hagy v. PruittSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Chewning v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
  2. James v. DanielsDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API