Madden v. Cox

CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
CitationMadden v. Cox, 332 S.E.2d 102, 286 S.C. 127 (S.C. 1985)
Decision Date16 July 1985
Docket NumberNo. 81-CP-22-212,81-CP-22-212
PartiesVirginia B. MADDEN, as Executrix of the Estate of Frederick R. Madden, Respondent, v. Stacey E. COX, Roosevelt Cobb, and Long Manufacturing Company, Defendants, Long Manufacturing Company, Petitioner.
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

The above entitled cause is pending on appeal, 328 S.E.2d 108, in this Court. It now appears that the Petitioner wishes to withdraw the appeal and moves the Court for an Order dismissing the appeal.

IT IS ORDERED that the above captioned appeal be and hereby is...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
10 cases
  • Campbell v. Paschal
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • May 28, 1986
    ...the discretion of the trial judge. Madden v. Cox, 284 S.C. 574, 328 S.E.2d 108 (Ct.App.1985), petition for cert. dismissed, 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 102 (1985). To be competent as an expert, a witness by reason of study or experience or both must possess such knowledge or skill in a busines......
  • Ballou v. Sigma Nu General Fraternity
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • October 13, 1986
    ...the jury to disregard the statements. See Madden v. Cox, 284 S.C. 574, 328 S.E.2d 108 (Ct.App.1985),appeal dismissed, 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 102 (1985) (when an objection is timely made to improper remarks of counsel, the trial judge should rule on the objection, instruct counsel to desis......
  • State v. Nathari
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • March 21, 1990
    ...the weight of the testimony, not to its admissibility. Madden v. Cox, 284 S.C. 574, 328 S.E.2d 108 (Ct.App.1985), app. dism., 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 102 (1985). Finally, the trial court permitted the Solicitor to cross examine Nathari's witness in regard to her failure to come forth with ......
  • Wallace v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • October 18, 1989
    ...Craft, Inc., 270 S.C. 453, 242 S.E.2d 671 (1978); Madden v. Cox, 284 S.C. 574, 328 S.E.2d 108 (Ct.App.1985), appeal dismissed, 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 102 (1985). Proximate cause does not mean the sole cause; the defendant's conduct can be a proximate cause if it was at least one of the di......
  • Get Started for Free
4 books & journal articles
  • Rule 611. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
    • United States
    • South Carolina Evidence Annotated (SCBar) Chapter 1 - South carolina rules of evidence Article VI. WITNESSES
    • Invalid date
    ...SCRCP. The use of leading questions when examining a child, State v. Hale, 284 S.C. 348, 326 S.E.2d 418 (Ct. App. 1985), cert. denied, 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 533 (1985), is still permissible under the first sentence of subsection (c) which allows leading questions when "necessary to devel......
  • Rule 611. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
    • United States
    • South Carolina Evidence Annotated (SCBar) (2021 Ed.) Chapter 1 South Carolina Rules of Evidence Article VI. Witnesses
    • Invalid date
    ...SCRCP. The use of leading questions when examining a child, State v. Hale, 284 S.C. 348, 326 S.E.2d 418 (Ct. App. 1985), cert. denied, 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 533 (1985), is still permissible under the first sentence of subsection (c) which allows leading questions when "necessary to devel......
  • Rule 611. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
    • United States
    • South Carolina Evidence Annotated (SCBar) (2020 Ed.) Chapter 1 South Carolina Rules of Evidence Article VI. Witnesses
    • Invalid date
    ...SCRCP. The use of leading questions when examining a child, State v. Hale, 284 S.C. 348, 326 S.E.2d 418 (Ct. App. 1985), cert. denied, 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 533 (1985), is still permissible under the first sentence of subsection (c) which allows leading questions when "necessary to devel......
  • Rule 611. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation
    • United States
    • South Carolina Evidence Annotated (SCBar) (2019 Ed.) Chapter 1 South Carolina Rules of Evidence Article VI. Witnesses
    • Invalid date
    ...SCRCP. The use of leading questions when examining a child, State v. Hale, 284 S.C. 348, 326 S.E.2d 418 (Ct. App. 1985), cert. denied, 286 S.C. 127, 332 S.E.2d 533 (1985), is still permissible under the first sentence of subsection (c) which allows leading questions when "necessary to devel......