Geiger v. Carolina Pool Equipment Distributors, Inc., 19304
| Decision Date | 01 November 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 19304,19304 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | William N. GEIGER, Respondent, v. CAROLINA POOL EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTORS, INC., Appellant. |
Nelson, Mullins, Grier & Scarborough, and Lourie & Draine, Columbia, for appellant.
Graydon & Suber, Columbia, for respondent.
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for summary judgment. The motion was made pursuant to Circuit Court Rule 44, as amended. Respondent's contention that the order is not directly appealable is sustained.
An order denying a motion for summary judgment is an interlocutory decision and not directly appealable. The following from 4 Am.Jur. (2d) Appeal and Error, Section 104, p. 622, states the foregoing general rule and the reasons underlying it:
'However, the prevailing view seems to be that the denial of a motion for summary judgment is an interlocutory decision only and therefore not directly appealable, since such a denial is not an adjudication on the merits against the movant and he is not thereby foreclosed from the possibility of prevailing in the case when the facts are developed, * * *.'
An annotation on the subject may be found in 15 A.L.R.3d 899.
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wright v. Craft
...426, 426 (1974); Greenwich Sav. Bank v. Jones, 261 S.C. 515, 516-17, 201 S.E.2d 244, 245 (1973); Geiger v. Carolina Pool Equip. Distribs., Inc., 257 S.C. 112, 114, 184 S.E.2d 446, 447 (1971); Gilmore v. Ivey, 290 S.C. 53, 59, 348 S.E.2d 180, 184 (Ct.App. 1986); Assocs. Fin. Servs. Co. of S.......
-
Ballenger v. Bowen
...185, 203 S.E.2d 426 (1974); Greenwich Savings Bank v. Jones, 261 S.C. 515, 201 S.E.2d 244 (1973); Geiger v. Carolina Pool Equipment Distributors, Inc., 257 S.C. 112, 184 S.E.2d 446 (1971); see also Gilmore v. Ivey, 290 S.C. 53, 348 S.E.2d 180 (Ct.App.1986); Associates Financial Services Co.......
-
State ex rel. Medlock v. Nest Egg Soc. Today, Inc.
...summary judgment is not an adjudication on the merits in favor of the party opposing the motion. Geiger v. Carolina Pool Equipment Distributors, Inc., 257 S.C. 112, 184 S.E.2d 446 (1971). Thus, the denial of the State's motion was not a judicial determination that Nest Egg was innocent of a......
-
Olson v. Faculty House of Carolina, Inc.
...185, 203 S.E.2d 426 (1974); Greenwich Savings Bank v. Jones, 261 S.C. 515, 201 S.E.2d 244 (1973); Geiger v. Carolina Pool Equipment Distributors, Inc., 257 S.C. 112, 184 S.E.2d 446 (1971); see also Gilmore v. Ivey, 290 S.C. 53, 348 S.E.2d 180 (Ct.App.1986); Associates Financial Services Co.......