Legal Opinion · Dissent

Parsons v. John Wieland Homes & Neighborhoods of the Carolinas, Inc.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided August 17, 2016No. Appellate Case 2014-000782; Opinion 27655Published

1Dissent

ACTING JUSTICE TOAL:

I respectfully dissent. I disagree that the outrageous and unforeseeable tort exception is not a general contract principle. Accordingly, I believe the majority errs in overruling previous South Carolina cases that apply the exception. Moreover, the majority’s opinion undermines the protections the Court has previously extended to homebuyers in Kennedy v. Columbia Lumber & Manufacturing Co.11 and its progeny. See, e.g., Smith v. Breedlove, 377 S.C. 415, 422-24, 661 S.E.2d 67, 71-72 (2008). Therefore, I dissent.

I. General Contract Principles

In “overruling] the judiciary’s…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Stolt-Nielsen S. A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
  5. Perry v. ThomasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987

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

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

Powered by the Exa API