Pendergrass v. Martin

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Pendergrass v. Martin

272 S.E.2d 172, 275 S.C. 413, 1980 S.C. LEXIS 476

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedNovember 12, 1980

Docket21324

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 272 S.E.2d 172 (Pendergrass v. Martin) 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

Pendergrass v. Martin, 272 S.E.2d 172, 275 S.C. 413, 1980 S.C. LEXIS 476 (S.C. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Lewis, Chief Justice:

Under Rule 89 of the Circuit Court Rules, answers to a request for admissions must be served within ten (10) days after the service of the request. Defendant served request for admissions on plaintiff and plaintiff failed to answer them within the ten day period. After the time for answering the request had expired, the trial judge granted plaintiff an extension of time to respond. The defendant has appealed from that ruling.

The order granting an extension of time in which to answer a request for admissions is intermediate or interlocutory in nature and does not involve the merits or a substantial right under Section 14-3-330 of the South Carolina Code of Laws (1976), but is reviewable after final judgment [414]*414under Section 18-1-130 of the South Carolina Code of Laws (1976).

See: Wallace v. Interamerican Trust Company, 246 S. C. 563, 144 S. E. (2d) 813; Kemmerlin v. Bloom, 251 S. C. 49, 159 S. E. (2d) 910.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Littlejohn, Ness, Gregory and Harwell, JJ., concur.

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