Janhrette v. Union Camp Paper Corp., 22752
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Citation | 358 S.E.2d 704,293 S.C. 59 |
| Decision Date | 12 June 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 22752,22752 |
| Parties | Sam W. JANHRETTE, Appellant, v. UNION CAMP PAPER CORPORATION and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Respondents. . Heard |
Page 704
v.
UNION CAMP PAPER CORPORATION and Liberty Mutual Insurance
Company, Respondents.
Decided July 20, 1987.
R. Jonathan Hart, of Lee and Clark, P.C., Savannah, Ga., for appellant.
Ladson F. Howell and Audrey P. Peartree, both of Howell, Gibson and Boney, P.A., Beaufort, for respondents.
HARWELL, Justice:
This is a workers compensation case. Appellant attempted to appeal an order of a single commissioner directly to the circuit court. The circuit court dismissed the appeal. We affirm.
Page 705
We have previously addressed the issue of whether an appeal from a single commissioner's decision can be taken [293 S.C. 60] directly to the circuit court without first being reviewed by the full commission. In Riddle v. Fairforest Finishing Co., 198 S.C. 419, 426, 18 S.E.2d 341, 344 (1942), we concluded:
Thus, it seems to us made plain, that the intention of the legislature was to provide for the disposition of a claim made to the Industrial Commission by the orderly process of a hearing before a single commissioner, or a deputy appointed by the full commission; a review, by the full commission, of the single commissioner's award; an appeal from an award by the full commission to the Court of Common Pleas; and an appeal from the Court of Common Pleas to the Supreme Court.
The holding in Riddle was based on sections 58 through 60 of the Worker's Compensation Act of 1935. 1936 S.C. Acts 1259-60. These sections are substantively identical to the current code sections which set forth the mechanics for appealing a single commissioner's decision. See S.C.Code Ann. §§ 42-17-40 to -60 (1976, as amended). Our prior holding in the Riddle case is dispositive of this issue. See also, e.g., Greer v. Greenville County, 245 S.C. 442, 141 S.E.2d 91 (1965); Walsh v. U.S. Rubber Company, 238 S.C. 411, 120 S.E.2d 685 (1961); Wall v. C.Y. Thomason Company, 232 S.C. 153, 101 S.E.2d 286 (1957).
We affirm the circuit court's dismissal of appellant's appeal.
AFFIRMED.
NESS, C.J., and GREGORY, CHANDLER and FINNEY, JJ., concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Franklin, 24190
...when the solicitor violates Batson, "the jury shall be quashed and the process of selecting the jury shall start de novo." Id. at 58, 358 S.E.2d at 704. Jones recognized that "members of the tainted jury and all persons who were struck" may be placed back in the jury venire. Id. at 58, n. 3......
-
State v. Edwards, 4261.
...quashed jury will then reenter the jury venire, and jury selection will begin anew from the jury venire. Jones, 293 S.C. at 58 n. 3, 358 S.E.2d at 704 n. Once a juror has been unconstitutionally struck, the jury selection process relative to that juror is tainted. State v. Lewis, 363 S.C. 3......
-
State v. Cochran, 4116.
...Members of the tainted jury and all persons who were struck may be placed back in the jury venire. Jones, 293 S.C. at 58, 358 S.E.2d at 704. Once a juror has been unconstitutionally stricken, the jury selection process relative to that juror is tainted. State v. Lewis, 363 S.C. 37, 609 S.E.......
-
State v. Easler, 2512
...when the solicitor violates Batson, "the jury shall be quashed and the process of selecting the jury shall start de novo." Id. at 58, 358 S.E.2d at 704. Jones recognized that "members of the tainted jury and all persons who were struck" may be placed back in the jury venire. Id. at 58, n. 3......