Stutler v. SC Farm Bureau

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
DecidedSeptember 19, 2012
Docket2012-UP-529
StatusUnpublished

This text of Stutler v. SC Farm Bureau (Stutler v. SC Farm Bureau) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stutler v. SC Farm Bureau, (S.C. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Jeff Stutler, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company d/b/a South Carolina Farm Bureau Insurance Companies, Dillon County Fire Department, and Bobby Lee Thompson, Defendants,

Of whom Dillon County Fire Department and Bobby Lee Thompson are Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2010-179649

Appeal From Dillon County Paul M. Burch, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-529 Submitted August 1, 2012 – Filed September 19, 2012

AFFIRMED

Daniel Nathan Hughey, of Hughey Law Firm, LLC, of Mount Pleasant, for Appellant.

C. Heath Ruffner, of Harris, McLeod & Ruffner, of Cheraw, for Respondent Dillon County Fire Department. Andrew F. Lindemann and Daniel C. Plyler, both of Davidson & Lindemann, P.A., of Columbia, for Respondent Bobby Lee Thompson.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed1 pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Williams v. Watkins, 384 S.C. 319, 324, 681 S.E.2d 914, 916 (Ct. App. 2009) ("Relief under Rule 60(b)(1), SCRCP, lies within the sound discretion of the [trial judge] and will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion." (internal quotation marks omitted)); id. ("An abuse of discretion arises where the judgment is controlled by an error of law or is based on factual conclusions that are without evidentiary support."); Paul Davis Sys., Inc. v. Deepwater of Hilton Head, LLC, 362 S.C. 220, 225, 607 S.E.2d 358, 360-61 (Ct. App. 2004) ("It is incumbent upon the party seeking relief pursuant to Rule 60(b)(1) to show the applicability of one of the qualifying grounds [of mistake or inadvertence].").

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, THOMAS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

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

Related

Williams v. Watkins
681 S.E.2d 914 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2009)
Paul Davis Systems, Inc. v. Deepwater of Hilton Head, LLC
607 S.E.2d 358 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Stutler v. SC Farm Bureau, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stutler-v-sc-farm-bureau-scctapp-2012.