Log In
  • India
  • UK & Ireland
CaseMine Logo
Please enter at least 3 characters.
Parallel Search is an AI-driven legal research functionality that uses natural language understanding to find conceptually relevant case law, even without exact keyword matches.
Hi, I'm AMICUS. Your GPT powered virtual legal assistant. Let's chat.
  • Parallel Search NEW
  • CaseIQ
  • AMICUS (Powered by GPT)
  • Federal
    U.S. Supreme Court
    Federal Circuit
    1st Circuit
    2d Circuit
    3d Circuit
    4th Circuit
    5th Circuit
    6th Circuit
    7th Circuit
    8th Circuit
    9th Circuit
    10th Circuit
    11th Circuit
    Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Special Courts
    Bankruptcy
  • State
    Alabama
    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Arizona
    California
    Colorado
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    District Of Columbia
    Florida
    Georgia
    Guam
    Hawaii
    Iowa
    Idaho
    Illinois
    Indiana
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Massachusetts
    Maryland
    Maine
    Michigan
    Minnesota
    Missouri
    Mississippi
    Montana
    Nebraska
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    New Hampshire
    New Jersey
    Northern Mariana Islands
    New Mexico
    Nevada
    New York
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Pennsylvania
    Puerto Rico
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Virginia
    Vermont
    Washington
    Wisconsin
    West Virginia
    Wyoming
Log In Sign Up US Judgments
  • India
  • UK & Ireland

Alert

How is this helpful for me?

  • Creating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:
    1. Claim the judgments where you have appeared by linking them directly to your profile and maintain a record of your body of work.
    2. Interact directly with CaseMine users looking for advocates in your area of specialization.
  • Creating a unique profile web page containing interviews, posts, articles, as well as the cases you have appeared in, greatly enhances your digital presence on search engines such Google and Bing, resulting in increased client interest.
  • The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.

  Know more  

Create your profile now
  • Commentaries
  • Judgments

South Carolina Case Commentaries

Employee Acquiescence and Employer Notice as Sufficient for Mandatory Coverage under Workmen's Compensation Act: Ham v. Mullins Lumber Co. (193 S.C. 66)

Employee Acquiescence and Employer Notice as Sufficient for Mandatory Coverage under Workmen's Compensation Act: Ham v. Mullins Lumber Co. (193 S.C. 66)

Date: Mar 8, 1940
Employee Acquiescence and Employer Notice as Sufficient for Mandatory Coverage under Workmen's Compensation Act: Ham v. Mullins Lumber Co. (193 S.C. 66) Introduction Ham v. Mullins Lumber Co. et al....
Expansive Definition of 'Accident' for Hernia Claims under South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act

Expansive Definition of 'Accident' for Hernia Claims under South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act

Date: Jun 13, 1939
Expansive Definition of 'Accident' for Hernia Claims under South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act Introduction In the landmark case of Layton v. Hammond-Brown-Jennings Co. et al. (190 S.C. 425),...
Employer Liability under Workmen's Compensation Act for Subcontractor Employees: Marchbanks v. Duke Power Co.

Employer Liability under Workmen's Compensation Act for Subcontractor Employees: Marchbanks v. Duke Power Co.

Date: May 10, 1939
Employer Liability under Workmen's Compensation Act for Subcontractor Employees: Marchbanks v. Duke Power Co. Introduction Marchbanks v. Duke Power Co. is a landmark case adjudicated by the Supreme...
Strict Compliance Required for Hernia Compensation Claims under South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act

Strict Compliance Required for Hernia Compensation Claims under South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act

Date: Jan 4, 1939
Strict Compliance Required for Hernia Compensation Claims under South Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act Introduction RUDD v. FAIRFOREST FINISHING CO. ET AL. is a pivotal case adjudicated by the...
Affirmation of Public Purpose in Slum Clearance and Low-Cost Housing Projects: McNulty v. Owens (1938)

Affirmation of Public Purpose in Slum Clearance and Low-Cost Housing Projects: McNulty v. Owens (1938)

Date: Oct 14, 1938
Affirmation of Public Purpose in Slum Clearance and Low-Cost Housing Projects: McNulty v. Owens (1938) Introduction McNulty v. Owens is a landmark case decided by the Supreme Court of South Carolina...
Incorporation of Resort Communities: Constitutional Limitations Affirmed in Thomas v. Macklen et al.

Incorporation of Resort Communities: Constitutional Limitations Affirmed in Thomas v. Macklen et al.

Date: Mar 3, 1938
Incorporation of Resort Communities: Constitutional Limitations Affirmed in Thomas v. Macklen et al. Introduction Thomas v. Macklen et al. (186 S.C. 290, 1938) is a landmark decision by the Supreme...
Upheld Authority of Public Service Entities: Clarke v. South Carolina Public Service Authority (1935)

Upheld Authority of Public Service Entities: Clarke v. South Carolina Public Service Authority (1935)

Date: Sep 11, 1935
Upheld Authority of Public Service Entities: Clarke v. South Carolina Public Service Authority (1935) Introduction Clarke v. South Carolina Public Service Authority (177 S.C. 427, 1935) is a landmark...
Scintilla Rule and Directed Verdict in Insurance Litigation: Turner v. American Motorists Insurance Co.

Scintilla Rule and Directed Verdict in Insurance Litigation: Turner v. American Motorists Insurance Co.

Date: May 16, 1934
Scintilla Rule and Directed Verdict in Insurance Litigation: Turner v. American Motorists Insurance Co. Introduction Turner et al. v. American Motorists Insurance Company is a landmark case decided...
Heslep v. State Highway Dept.: Clarifying Motor Vehicle Licenses as Regulatory Privileges

Heslep v. State Highway Dept.: Clarifying Motor Vehicle Licenses as Regulatory Privileges

Date: Dec 6, 1933
Heslep v. State Highway Dept.: Clarifying Motor Vehicle Licenses as Regulatory Privileges Introduction Heslep v. State Highway Dept. of South Carolina et al. is a landmark decision by the Supreme...
Negligence Per Se and Presumption of Proximate Cause in Grade Crossing Accidents: An Analysis of Ford v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.

Negligence Per Se and Presumption of Proximate Cause in Grade Crossing Accidents: An Analysis of Ford v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.

Date: May 12, 1932
Negligence Per Se and Presumption of Proximate Cause in Grade Crossing Accidents: An Analysis of Ford v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. Introduction Ford v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, 169 S.C....
Clarification on Jury Instructions and Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Reverses State v. King

Clarification on Jury Instructions and Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Reverses State v. King

Date: Oct 9, 1930
Clarification on Jury Instructions and Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Reverses State v. King Introduction State v. King (158 S.C. 251), adjudicated by the Supreme Court of South Carolina on October...
Duncan v. Record Publishing Company: Establishing New Libel Precedents

Duncan v. Record Publishing Company: Establishing New Libel Precedents

Date: Sep 22, 1927
Duncan v. Record Publishing Company: Establishing New Libel Precedents Introduction Duncan v. The Record Publishing Company et al. (145 S.C. 196), adjudicated by the Supreme Court of South Carolina...
Liability and Proximate Cause in Railroad Crossing Accidents: Insights from Miller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company (1927)

Liability and Proximate Cause in Railroad Crossing Accidents: Insights from Miller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company (1927)

Date: Jul 1, 1927
Liability and Proximate Cause in Railroad Crossing Accidents: Insights from Miller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company (1927) Introduction Miller, Administrator, v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad...
Enforcing the Sanctity of Written Contracts: Insights from J.B. Colt Company v. Britt

Enforcing the Sanctity of Written Contracts: Insights from J.B. Colt Company v. Britt

Date: Jul 26, 1924
Enforcing the Sanctity of Written Contracts: Insights from J.B. Colt Company v. Britt Introduction The case of J.B. Colt Company v. Britt, adjudicated by the Supreme Court of South Carolina on July...
Restricting the Admissibility of Prior Similar Crimes for Establishing Identity and Intent: Analysis of State v. Lyle (1923)

Restricting the Admissibility of Prior Similar Crimes for Establishing Identity and Intent: Analysis of State v. Lyle (1923)

Date: Aug 24, 1923
Restricting the Admissibility of Prior Similar Crimes for Establishing Identity and Intent: Analysis of State v. Lyle (1923) Introduction State v. Lyle is a landmark case adjudicated by the Supreme...
Duty of Railroads to Provide Adequate Warnings at Public Crossings: Insights from Chisolm v. Seaboard Air Line Ry.

Duty of Railroads to Provide Adequate Warnings at Public Crossings: Insights from Chisolm v. Seaboard Air Line Ry.

Date: Oct 13, 1922
Duty of Railroads to Provide Adequate Warnings at Public Crossings: Insights from Chisolm v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Introduction Chisolm v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. is a landmark case decided by the...
Powers v. Rawls: Upholding Comprehensive Jury Instructions and Deed Validity

Powers v. Rawls: Upholding Comprehensive Jury Instructions and Deed Validity

Date: Apr 12, 1922
Powers v. Rawls: Upholding Comprehensive Jury Instructions and Deed Validity Introduction Powers v. Rawls et al. (119 S.C. 134), decided by the Supreme Court of South Carolina on April 11, 1922,...
Establishing Duty of Care at Railroad Crossings: Insights from Callison v. Charleston W.C. Ry. Co.

Establishing Duty of Care at Railroad Crossings: Insights from Callison v. Charleston W.C. Ry. Co.

Date: Oct 21, 1916
Establishing Duty of Care at Railroad Crossings: Insights from Callison v. Charleston W.C. Ry. Co. Introduction Callison v. Charleston Western Carolina Railway Company is a landmark case decided by...
Delegation of Bonded Indebtedness Authority to County Commissions: Insights from Lillard v. Melton et al.

Delegation of Bonded Indebtedness Authority to County Commissions: Insights from Lillard v. Melton et al.

Date: Dec 18, 1915
Delegation of Bonded Indebtedness Authority to County Commissions: Insights from Lillard v. Melton et al. Introduction Lillard v. Melton et al. (103 S.C. 10), adjudicated by the Supreme Court of...
Electrocution as Capital Punishment: Insights from State v. Malloy (95 S.C. 441)

Electrocution as Capital Punishment: Insights from State v. Malloy (95 S.C. 441)

Date: Apr 8, 1913
Electrocution as Capital Punishment: Insights from State v. Malloy (95 S.C. 441) Introduction State v. Malloy is a landmark case decided by the Supreme Court of South Carolina on April 7, 1913. In...
Previous   Next
CaseMine Logo

Know us better!

  • Request a Demo
  • Watch Casemine overview Videos

Company

  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • Careers
  • Columns
  • Contact Us

Help

  • Pricing
  • Help & Support
  • Features
  • Workflow
  • CaseMine API
  • CaseMine's Bespoke AI Solutions
  • Judge Signup
  • Student Signup

CaseMine Tools

  • CaseIQ
  • Judgment Search
  • Parallel Search
  • AttorneyIQ
  • Browse Cases

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Summary

Alert