Category Archives: Standards of Review

South Carolina Lets a $ 450,000 Verdict Stand

On Wednesday, the South Carolina Supreme Court declined to disturb a Court of Appeals decision that upheld a tort victim’s $ 450,000 jury verdict. Curtis v. Blake, 392 S.C. 494, 709 S.E.2d 79 (Ct.App. 2011), cert. dismissed as improvidently granted, Op. No. 2012-MO-043 (S.C. filed October 24, 2012).

On appeal, I defended the verdict by pointing to the Court’s limited, “any evidence” standard of review for a jury’s factual findings. Continue reading

Standards of Review on Appeal – Administrative Agencies

This post finishes up the discussion on standards of review — how much deference the appellate courts pay to the rulings being appealed. Earlier posts discussed de novo  review for questions of law, the any evidence review of factual findings in actions at law, the preponderance review for factual findings in actions in equity, and the abuse of discretion review for most pre-trial and trial rulings.

This post covers appeals from administrative agencies, particularly the Workers Compensation Commission. Continue reading

Standards of Review on Appeal: Questions of Law or Fact?

This post and the next three explore the South Carolina appellate courts’ varying degrees of deference to trial court rulings.This post addresses divides the universe of possible appellate issues into issues of law and questions of fact, explains why the two are treated differently, and offers a tip on how the use the difference. The next three posts cover the differing standards of review for factual findings made in actions at law and in equity, certain rulings made pre-trial and at trial, and factual findings by administrative agencies. Continue reading