Rayfield v. South Carolina Department of Corrections
379 S.E.2d 133, 298 S.C. 204
This text of 379 S.E.2d 133 (Rayfield v. South Carolina Department of Corrections) 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
Rayfield v. South Carolina Department of Corrections, 379 S.E.2d 133, 298 S.C. 204 (S.C. 1989).
Opinion
D. Stephen RAYFIELD, As Administrator of the Estate of Billie Lewis Rayfield, Petitioner
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, William D. Leeke, James E. Aikens, William C. Wallace, Robert L. Foulks, Herbert Davis, William Weston, Eugene R. Grant, Robert E. Reynolds, John E. Huss, Marion Beasley, Lee Cathcart, Rhett Jackson, Hugh L. Lackey, Charles R. Sanders, Jesse Pratt and Grady A. Wallace, Respondents. D. Stephen RAYFIELD, As Administrator of the Estate of Evelyn R. Rayfield, Petitioner
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, William D. Leeke, James E. Aikens, William C. Wallace, Robert L. Foulks, Herbert Davis, William Weston, Eugene R. Grant, Robert E. Reynolds, John E. Huss, Marion Beasley, Lee Cathcart, Rhett Jackson, Hugh L. Lackey, Charles R. Sanders, Jesse Pratt and Grady A. Wallace, Respondents.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
May 4, 1989.
ORDER
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied. Therefore, the petition of the South Carolina Trial Lawyers Association to appear as amicus curiae is denied.
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
379 S.E.2d 133, 298 S.C. 204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rayfield-v-south-carolina-department-of-corrections-sc-1989.