Brown v. State Farm

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Brown v. State Farm

DecidedJuly 11, 2018

Docket2018-UP-317

StatusUnpublished

This text of Brown v. State Farm (Brown v. State Farm) 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.

Bluebook

Brown v. State Farm, (S.C. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Levi Thomas Brown, Appellant,

v.

State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2017-000479

Appeal From Charleston County W. Jeffrey Young, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-317 Submitted June 1, 2018 – Filed July 11, 2018

AFFIRMED

Robert Emmet Treacy, Jr., and Patrick Thomas Napolski, both of George Sink, PA Injury Lawyers, of North Charleston, for Appellant.

Timothy Alan Domin, of Clawson & Staubes, LLC, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: In this appeal from a declaratory judgment action, Levi Thomas Brown appeals the circuit court's ruling that State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company's uninsured motorist provision provided no coverage for a gunshot injury Brown sustained while operating the insured vehicle. The circuit court found the injury was not covered under the policy because it was not foreseeably identifiable with the normal use of an automobile and the policy contained an exclusion for bodily injury resulting from the discharge of a firearm. Brown did not appeal the circuit court's ruling concerning the exclusion. We affirm1 pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Jones v. Lott, 387 S.C. 339, 346, 692 S.E.2d 900, 903 (2010) ("Under the two issue rule, [when] a decision is based on more than one ground, the appellate court will affirm unless the appellant appeals all grounds because the unappealed ground will become the law of the case."); Anderson v. Short, 323 S.C. 522, 525, 476 S.E.2d 475, 477 (1996) (affirming the circuit court's decision when it ruled against the appellant on two grounds and the appellant only challenged the second ground on appeal).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and HILL, 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

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Levi Thomas Brown, Appellant,

v.

State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2017-000479

Appeal From Charleston County W. Jeffrey Young, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-317 Submitted June 1, 2018 – Filed July 11, 2018

AFFIRMED

Robert Emmet Treacy, Jr., and Patrick Thomas Napolski, both of George Sink, PA Injury Lawyers, of North Charleston, for Appellant.

Timothy Alan Domin, of Clawson & Staubes, LLC, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: In this appeal from a declaratory judgment action, Levi Thomas Brown appeals the circuit court's ruling that State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company's uninsured motorist provision provided no coverage for a gunshot injury Brown sustained while operating the insured vehicle. The circuit court found the injury was not covered under the policy because it was not foreseeably identifiable with the normal use of an automobile and the policy contained an exclusion for bodily injury resulting from the discharge of a firearm. Brown did not appeal the circuit court's ruling concerning the exclusion. We affirm1 pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Jones v. Lott, 387 S.C. 339, 346, 692 S.E.2d 900, 903 (2010) ("Under the two issue rule, [when] a decision is based on more than one ground, the appellate court will affirm unless the appellant appeals all grounds because the unappealed ground will become the law of the case."); Anderson v. Short, 323 S.C. 522, 525, 476 S.E.2d 475, 477 (1996) (affirming the circuit court's decision when it ruled against the appellant on two grounds and the appellant only challenged the second ground on appeal).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and HILL, JJ., concur.

1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Brown v. State Farm, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-state-farm-scctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack