Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Orangeburg v. Edwards

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided October 8, 1980No. 21311Published

1DissentNess, Justice

(dissenting) :

I dissent and would affirm the trial court. In my view the majority gives an overly strict interpretation to § 28-9-90, Code of Laws of South Carolina (1976), in dismissing the appeal because the City of Orangeburg served its notice of appeal on Carolyn Edwards’ attorney rather than her.

Although § 28-9-90, supra, designates notices to be served in the same manner as a summons in a civil action, I believe the interests of justice dictate a more liberal interpretation of the statute than given by the majority.

It is well-settled that once an action has been commenced and an…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Anderson v. AndersonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1941

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

Powered by the Exa API