Mears v. Mears

337 S.E.2d 206, 287 S.C. 168, 1985 S.C. LEXIS 524
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedAugust 29, 1985
StatusPublished
Cited by32 cases

This text of 337 S.E.2d 206 (Mears v. Mears) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mears v. Mears, 337 S.E.2d 206, 287 S.C. 168, 1985 S.C. LEXIS 524 (S.C. 1985).

Opinion

ORDER

Appellant petitions this Court to relax Supreme Court Rule 1, § 1 A and § 1 C. Respondent has filed a return in which she opposes the petition.

Appellant’s counsel received written notice that the order had been rendered on April 29,1985. Appellant did not serve the notice of intent to appeal on opposing counsel until June 14, 1985.

Under Supreme Court Rule 1, § 1 A, the notice of intent to appeal should have been served on the opposing party or his attorney within ten (10) days of receipt of written notice that the order had been rendered. Therefore, appellant’s service of the notice of intent to appeal was untimely by some thirty-six (36) days.

Service of the notice of intent to appeal is a jurisdictional requirement, and this Court has no authority to extend or expand the time in which the notice of intent to appeal must be served. Stroup v. Duke Power Co., 216 S. C. 79, 56 S. E. (2d) 745 (1949); Wade v. Gore, 154 S. C. 262, 151 S. E. 470 (1930); Renneker v. Warren, 20 S. C. 581 (1884). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. First Carolina National Bank v. A & S Enterprises, Inc., 272 S. C. 339, 251 S. E. (2d) 762 (1979).

We note that Act No. 100 of 1985 has repealed S. C. Code Ann. § 18-9-60 (1976) upon which Supreme Court Rule 1, § 1 A, is based. Despite this repeal, the timely service of the notice of intent to appeal will remain a jurisdictional requirement.

It is so ordered.

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

Related

State v. Dustin Lee Hooper
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2022
SCDSS v. Velasquez
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2021
Smith v. Newton
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2021
Lemmons v. Macedonia Water Works, Inc.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2020
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Fallon Props. S.C., LLC
810 S.E.2d 856 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2018)
Baracco v, Beaufort County
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2016
Oliver v. Lawrence
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2016
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Sistrunk
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2016
SCDSS v. Smalls
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2015
SCDCA v. Entera Holdings
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2015
Transportation Associates v. Bishop
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2015
State v. Stewart
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2013
Johnson v. Mew
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2012
Camp v. Camp
689 S.E.2d 634 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2010)
Timothy Davis v. SC Department of Corrections
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2009
Kemppinen v. Alltel, South Carolina
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2008
Fields v. Regional Medical Center Orangeburg
609 S.E.2d 506 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2005)
Elam v. South Carolina Department of Transportation
602 S.E.2d 772 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2004)
Keowee Invest ment Group, LLC v. Pickens County
Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2004

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
337 S.E.2d 206, 287 S.C. 168, 1985 S.C. LEXIS 524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mears-v-mears-sc-1985.