Bell v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
This text of Bell v. South Carolina Department of Corrections (Bell v. South Carolina Department of Corrections) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals
James Cal Bell, Othella Bernard, Katherina Bowyer, Linda M. W. Bratton, Ann T. Bridges, Rance C. Cobb, Jeannie B. Croxton, Bernetha L. Culbreath, William K. Dreyer, Jacqueline D. Farr, Ruth Fritts, Nancy Glenn, Etta Jane Jones, Geneva M. Martin, Mary H. McCabe, Beverly McClanahan, Max D. Randolph, Carolyn McIver Smith, Maggie G. Williams, and Paula Woodlief, Respondents,
v.
South Carolina Department of Corrections and Palmetto Unified School District No. 1, Defendants,
Of Whom South Carolina Department of Corrections is the Appellant.
Appeal From Richland County
G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-257
Submitted May 1, 2008 Filed May 14, 2008
APPEAL DISMISSED
Lake Eric Summers and Malone Thompson Summers, both of Columbia, for Appellant.
W. Allen Nickles, III, and Dona L. Guffey, both of Columbia, for Respondents.
PER CURIAM: South Carolina Department of Corrections appeals the circuit courts order directing the Office of Human Resources to reinstate a grievance for a hearing before the State Employee Grievance Committee. We dismiss[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Leviner v. Sonoco Prods. Co., 339 S.C. 492, 494, 530 S.E.2d 127, 128 (2000); Montjoy v. Asten-Hill Dryer Fabrics, 316 S.C. 52, 52, 446 S.E.2d 618, 618 (1994); Owens v. Canal Wood Corp., 281 S.C. 491, 492, 316 S.E.2d 385, 385 (1984); Hunt v. Whitt, 279 S.C. 343, 343, 306 S.E.2d 621, 622 (1983) (all finding a circuit court order remanding a case for additional proceedings before an administrative agency is not directly appealable).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
HEARN, C.J., and SHORT and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.
[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bell v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-south-carolina-department-of-corrections-scctapp-2008.