Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Bailey v. Peacock

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided February 27, 1995No. 24204PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Toal, Justice:

This appeal arises from the granting of a new trial nisi additur in a negligence action. We reverse.

FACTS

Michael A. Bailey (Bailey) sued Richard Lee Peacock (Peacock) for damages for injuries he received in an automobile collision with Peacock. Peacock admitted negligence but contested whether the accident was the proximate cause of Bailey’s injuries. Bailey claimed he suffered severe back pain from bulging disks that were caused by the accident.

Bailey consulted several doctors after the accident. Evidence at trial was conflicting as to whether or not the accident caused…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rush v. BlanchardSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
  2. Folkens Ex Rel. Estate of McLendon v. HuntSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1990
  3. Pelican Building Centers of Horry-Georgetown, Inc. v. DuttonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
  4. South Carolina State Highway Department v. ClarksonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
  5. Easler v. HEJAZ TEMPLE OF GREENVILLE, SCSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Hawkins v. Greenwood Development Corp.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1997
  2. Vinson v. HartleyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1996
  3. Watson v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2010
  4. Riley Ex Rel. Estate of Riley v. Ford Motor Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2015
  5. Carson v. CSX Transportation, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2012

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API