Legal Opinion

Marr v. City of Columbia

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 6, 1992No. 23605PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Toal, Justice:

Marr brought this action claiming that his employer, the City of Columbia (“City”), breached his employment contract when they terminated his employment and the termination was in retaliation for filing a Worker’s Compensation Claim. The Circuit Court granted the City summary judgment on the issue of whether Marr had an employment contract with the City based upon the employee handbook. Marr’s claim of violation of S.C. Ann. Section 41-1-80 (Supp. 1991) (retaliatory discharge) was tried on the merits by the judge. See Wallace v. Milliken & Co., — S.C. —, 406 S.E. (2d) 358…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
  2. Small v. Springs Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  3. Stevenson v. StevensonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1981
  4. Wallace v. MILLIKEN & COMPANYSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  5. Tom Jenkins Realty, Inc. v. HiltonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Fleming v. Borden, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
  2. Williams v. RiedmanCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2000
  3. Hessenthaler v. Tri-County Sister Help, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
  4. Hinton v. Designer Ensembles, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
  5. Kumpf v. United Telephone Co. of the Carolinas, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993

13 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