Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

Walter Joseph BOGART, Appellant, v. FIRST CITIZENS BANK TRUST COMPANY,Coleman O. Glaze, Indi

May 23, 1979.

NESS, Justice:

Appellant Bogart brought this action for fraud and negligence against the respondent bank and one of its employees. This appeal is from an order granting summary judgment in favor of respondents on three causes of action. We affirm.

Appellant's single exception states: "The Honorable Court of Common Pleas erred in ordering Summary Judgment as to Causes of Action One, Four and Five." This is clearly in violation of Supreme Court Rule 4, § 6, which requires that each exception must contain a concise statement of one proposition of law or fact. Solley v. Weaver, 247 S.C. 129, 146 S.E.2d 164 (1966); Larry's Wheel and Rim, Inc. v. Citizens Southern National Bank of South Carolina, S.C. 246 S.E.2d 860 (1978).

When an exception fails to assign a specification of error sufficient to comply with Rule 4, § 6, this Court has nothing to review. Odom v. The County of Florence, 258 S.C. 480, 189 S.E.2d 293 (1972). Nevertheless, we have considered the merits of this case and have concluded summary judgment was properly granted. Watts v. Monarch Builders, Inc., et al., S.C. 252 S.E.2d 889 (1979).

Affirmed.

LEWIS, C.J., and LITTLEJOHN, RHODES and GREGORY, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BOGART v. FIRST CITIZENS BANK TRUST CO
(May 23, 1979)