Henderson v. Greer

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

Benjamin K. Henderson, Appellant,

v.

Patricia Greer, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2015-000409

Appeal From Aiken County
R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-431
Submitted September 1, 2016 – Filed October 19, 2016

AFFIRMED

William Franklin Barnes, III, of Peters Murdaugh Parker
Eltzroth & Detrick, PA, of Hampton, for Appellant.

Anthony Shane Massey, of Nance, McCants & Massey,
of Aiken, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Carson v. CSX Transp., Inc., 400 S.C. 221, 241, 734 S.E.2d 148, 158
(2012) ("This [c]ourt recognizes an abuse of discretion standard for reviewing a
circuit court's decision to deny a new trial nisi additur."); id. ("It is within a trial
[court's] province to grant a new trial nisi if [it] finds the amount of the verdict to
be merely inadequate or excessive."); id. at 241, 734 S.E.2d at 159 ("In reviewing
the trial court's decision regarding a new trial nisi, '[t]his [c]ourt has the duty to
review the record and determine whether there has been an abuse of discretion
amounting to an error of law.'" (quoting Bailey v. Peacock, 318 S.C. 13, 14, 455
S.E.2d 690, 691 (1995))); O'Neal v. Bowles, 314 S.C. 525, 527, 431 S.E.2d 555,
556 (1993) ("Therefore, on appeal of the denial of a motion for a new trial nisi, this
[c]ourt will reverse when the verdict is grossly inadequate or excessive requiring
the granting of a new trial absolute.").

AFFIRMED.1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and KONDUROS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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