Henderson v. Greer

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: October 19, 2016
• Docket: 2016-UP-431
• Status: Unpublished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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Benjamin K. Henderson, Appellant,

v.

Patricia Greer, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2015-000409

Appeal From Aiken County R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-431 Submitted September 1, 2016 – Filed October 19, 2016

AFFIRMED

William Franklin Barnes, III, of Peters Murdaugh Parker Eltzroth & Detrick, PA, of Hampton, for Appellant.

Anthony Shane Massey, of Nance, McCants & Massey, of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Carson v. CSX Transp., Inc., 400 S.C. 221, 241, 734 S.E.2d 148, 158 (2012) ("This [c]ourt recognizes an abuse of discretion standard for reviewing a circuit court's decision to deny a new trial nisi additur."); id. ("It is within a trial [court's] province to grant a new trial nisi if [it] finds the amount of the verdict to be merely inadequate or excessive."); id. at 241, 734 S.E.2d at 159 ("In reviewing the trial court's decision regarding a new trial nisi, '[t]his [c]ourt has the duty to review the record and determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion amounting to an error of law.'" (quoting Bailey v. Peacock, 318 S.C. 13, 14, 455 S.E.2d 690, 691 (1995))); O'Neal v. Bowles, 314 S.C. 525, 527, 431 S.E.2d 555, 556 (1993) ("Therefore, on appeal of the denial of a motion for a new trial nisi, this [c]ourt will reverse when the verdict is grossly inadequate or excessive requiring the granting of a new trial absolute.").

AFFIRMED.1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and KONDUROS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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