Marley v. Kirby

253 S.E.2d 370, 273 S.C. 16, 1979 S.C. LEXIS 337
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Marley v. Kirby. Read the opinion of the Court — 271 S.C. 122
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided March 27, 1979·No. 20920·Published

Opinion

Ness, Justice:

In Marley v. Kirby, S. C., 245 S. E. (2d) 604 (1978), we held the South Carolina comparative negligence statute unconstitutional and remanded the case for retrial. On re[17]*17mand, the trial judge ruled that since only Marley had appealed the original decision, the verdict against Kirby should not be disturbed. This was error.

Our intention in Marley v. Kirby was that- the entire case should be retried without the application of the comparative negligence statute. We reverse and remand for a new trial on all issues.

Reversed and remanded.

Lewis, C. J., and Littlejohn, Rhodes and Gregory, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Marley v. Kirby, 253 S.E.2d 370, 273 S.C. 16, 1979 S.C. LEXIS 337 (S.C. 1979).

253 S.E.2d 370 (Marley v. Kirby) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marley v. Kirby
245 S.E.2d 604 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1978)