Gray v. Georgetown Steel Corporation

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: September 17, 2007
• Docket: 2007-UP-369
• Status: Unpublished

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

Joey Gray, Employee, Respondent,

v.

Georgetown Steel Corporation, Employer, and Capital City Insurance Company, Carrier, Appellants.

---

Appeal From Georgetown County
 Steven H. John, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-369
Submitted September 1, 2007 – Filed September 17, 2007

---

APPEAL DISMISSED

---

Allison Carter, of Mt. Pleasant, for Appellants.

William S. Duncan, of Georgetown, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  In this workers’ compensation case the circuit court remanded the case to the Workers’ Compensation Commission to make specific findings of fact.  We dismiss the appeal.

FACTS

Joey Gray asserts he injured his back while driving a fork lift in the course and scope of his employment with Georgetown Steel.  Gray also claims he suffered hearing loss due to exposure to industrial noise during his employment with Georgetown Steel.  The single commissioner (the Commissioner) concluded Gray suffered a thirty-five percentage loss of use of the back.  The Commissioner did not award compensation for the hearing loss.  Georgetown Steel and its insurance carrier, Capital City Insurance Company (Insurance Company), appealed to the Full Commission. 

The Full Commission affirmed the Commissioner’s findings of fact and rulings of law.  On appeal to the circuit court, the court ruled that the Commissioner and the Full Commission failed to make specific findings of facts relating to the hearing loss issue.  Thus, the circuit court remanded the case.  Georgetown Steel and Insurance Company appeal the circuit court’s order to remand.

LAW/ANALYSIS

“[A]n order of the circuit court remanding a case for additional proceedings before an administrative agency is not directly appealable.”  Montjoy v. Asten-Hill Dryer Fabrics, 316 S.C. 52, 52, 446 S.E.2d 618, 618 (1994); Davis v. La-Z-Boy Chair Co., 287 S.C. 121, 122, 337 S.E.2d 238, 239 (Ct. App. 1985) (“[A]n appeal from a Circuit Court order remanding a workers’ compensation case for the purpose of making specific findings of fact is interlocutory and not reviewable by this court.”).  Thus, we dismiss the appeal.

APPEAL DISMISSED.[1] 

STILWELL, SHORT, AND WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

---

[1] We decide this case without oral arguments pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.