Gilliam v. Burns

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Gilliam v. Burns

DecidedApril 24, 2013

Docket2013-UP-163

StatusUnpublished

This text of Gilliam v. Burns (Gilliam v. Burns) 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

Gilliam v. Burns, (S.C. Ct. App. 2013).

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

Reginald M. Gilliam, Appellant,

v.

Judy Burns and Index Journal Newspaper, Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2011-193966

Appeal From Greenwood County Frank R. Addy, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-163 Submitted January 1, 2013 – Filed April 24, 2013

AFFIRMED

Reginald M. Gilliam, pro se.

Steven Michael Pruitt and Hannah Khristin Metts, both of McDonald Patrick Poston Hemphill & Roper, LLC, both of Greenwood, for Respondents. PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Doe v. Marion, 373 S.C. 390, 395, 645 S.E.2d 245, 247 (2007) ("In considering a motion to dismiss a complaint based on a failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, the trial court must base its ruling solely on allegations set forth in the complaint."); S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-550 (2005) (providing the statute of limitations for commencing an action for libel or slander is two years); Jones v. City of Folly Beach, 326 S.C. 360, 369, 483 S.E.2d 770, 775 (Ct. App. 1997) ("South Carolina has not adopted the discovery rule in libel and slander cases.").

AFFIRMED.1

FEW, C.J., WILLIAMS and PIEPER, 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

Reginald M. Gilliam, Appellant,

v.

Judy Burns and Index Journal Newspaper, Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2011-193966

Appeal From Greenwood County Frank R. Addy, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-163 Submitted January 1, 2013 – Filed April 24, 2013

AFFIRMED

Reginald M. Gilliam, pro se.

Steven Michael Pruitt and Hannah Khristin Metts, both of McDonald Patrick Poston Hemphill & Roper, LLC, both of Greenwood, for Respondents. PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Doe v. Marion, 373 S.C. 390, 395, 645 S.E.2d 245, 247 (2007) ("In considering a motion to dismiss a complaint based on a failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, the trial court must base its ruling solely on allegations set forth in the complaint."); S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-550 (2005) (providing the statute of limitations for commencing an action for libel or slander is two years); Jones v. City of Folly Beach, 326 S.C. 360, 369, 483 S.E.2d 770, 775 (Ct. App. 1997) ("South Carolina has not adopted the discovery rule in libel and slander cases.").

AFFIRMED.1

FEW, C.J., WILLIAMS and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Gilliam v. Burns, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilliam-v-burns-scctapp-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack