Legal Opinion

Schuermann v. American Ka-Ro Corp.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided April 4, 1988No. 22858PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ness, Chief Justice:

This is a contract interpretation case. Appellant (Employee) contends the trial court erred in denying him severance benefits under his employment contract with respondent (Company). We affirm as modified.

Employee seeks to recover under three sections of the contract: (1) section 2, which entitles Employee to a year end bonus equal to one month’s salary; (2) section 6, which requires each party to give six months’ notice of termination; and (3) section 7, a non-competition clause which provides that Company will pay Employee 75% of his monthly salary for two years after…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
  2. Berry v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1978
  3. Young v. McKelveySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
  4. Freeman v. King Pontiac Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1960
  5. Smith v. First Provident Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1965

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
  2. Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1997
  3. Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API