Plemmons v. State Farm Mutual

CourtListener 10148672Scctapp12 nov. 2014

Texte intégral

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

James Luther Plemmons and Wanda Sue Clark
Plemmons, Appellants,

v.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
Plaza Insurance Company, The Stover Company, Inc.,
and Howard E. Newton, III, Defendants,

Of Whom State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Company is the Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2013-001454

Appeal From Spartanburg County
J. Mark Hayes, II, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-389
Heard October 14, 2014 – Filed November 12, 2014

AFFIRMED

Duane Alan Lazenby and Ginger D. Goforth, both of
Lazenby Law Firm, LLC, and Andrew J. Johnston, of
Johnston Law Firm, LLC, all of Spartanburg, for
Appellants.
Charles R. Norris, of Nelson Mullins Riley &
Scarborough, LLP, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: James Luther Plemmons and Wanda Sue Clark Plemmons
appeal the circuit court's grant of State Farm Automobile Insurance Company's
motion for summary judgment. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and
the following authorities: Rule 56(c), SCRCP (instructing that summary judgment
should be granted when there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving
party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law); Hite v. Hartford Acc. & Indem.
Co., 288 S.C. 616, 619, 344 S.E.2d 173, 175 (Ct. App. 1986) ("Although 'use' is
unquestionably a broader term than 'operate' or 'drive,' the difficult determination is
whether [the] situation of an injury sustained remote to the actual operation of the
vehicle is encompassed by the term 'use.'"); id. at 621, 344 S.E.2d at 176 ("If the
injury was directly caused by some independent or intervening cause wholly
disassociated from, independent of or remote from the use of the automobile, the
injury cannot be said to arise out of its 'use.'"); id. at 621, 344 S.E.2d at 177
("[T]he key to determining whether injuries remote to the operation of an
automobile occur during a 'use' of the vehicle is the existence of a causal
connection between the injury and the use.").

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, SHORT, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.