Marr v. City of Columbia

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Marr v. City of Columbia

450 S.E.2d 46, 316 S.C. 301, 1994 S.C. LEXIS 220

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Marr v. City of Columbia. Read the opinion of the Court — 307 S.C. 545 →

Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided September 22, 1994·No. NO. 91-CP-40-3048·Published

Opinion

ORDER

After the Court of Appeals issued its opinion in this case, Marr v. City of Columbia,_S.C._, 432 S.E. (2d) 493 (Ct. App. 1993), this Court granted a writ of certiorari to review that opinion. The parties have now informed this Court that they have reached a settlement and ask this Court to dismiss this matter with prejudice and remand to the Workers’ Compensation Commission to approve the agreement executed by the parties. They also agree that each party will bear its own costs and expenses, to include attorney’s fee.

IT IS ORDERED.

/s/ A. Lee Chandler C.J.

/s/ Ernest A. Finney A.J.

Is/ Jean H. Toal A.J.

/b/ James E. Moore A.J.

/s/ John H. Waller Jr. A.J.

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

ORDER

After the Court of Appeals issued its opinion in this case, Marr v. City of Columbia,_S.C._, 432 S.E. (2d) 493 (Ct. App. 1993), this Court granted a writ of certiorari to review that opinion. The parties have now informed this Court that they have reached a settlement and ask this Court to dismiss this matter with prejudice and remand to the Workers’ Compensation Commission to approve the agreement executed by the parties. They also agree that each party will bear its own costs and expenses, to include attorney’s fee.

IT IS ORDERED.

/s/ A. Lee Chandler C.J.

/s/ Ernest A. Finney A.J.

Is/ Jean H. Toal A.J.

/b/ James E. Moore A.J.

/s/ John H. Waller Jr. A.J.

Marr v. City of Columbia, 450 S.E.2d 46, 316 S.C. 301, 1994 S.C. LEXIS 220 (S.C. 1994).

Pincite

450 S.E.2d 46 (Marr v. City of Columbia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related