Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ardis v. Sessions

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided August 3, 2009No. 26695Published

1Dissent

Justice PLEICONES:

I respectfully dissent. While I agree with the majority that the “good faith” jury instruction was erroneous, I also find that the charge was prejudicial and would affirm the Court of Appeals.

If the jury believed Ardis’s assertion that Sessions performed a manipulation under the circumstances she described, the jury must still have found that her version of the facts demonstrated negligence on the part of Sessions, in order for Ardis to prevail. See Hurd v. Williamsburg Co., 353 S.C. 596, 615, 579 S.E.2d 136, 146 (Ct.App.2003), aff'd, 363 S.C. 421, 611 S.E.2d 488 (The burden…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McCourt by and Through McCourt v. AbernathySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
  2. Hurd v. Williamsburg CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
  3. Hurd v. Williamsburg CountyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2003
  4. Hosford v. WynnSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1887

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

Powered by the Exa API