Quicken Loans, Inc. v. Wilson

CourtListener 7479302Scctapp9 de jan. de 2019

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

II. REMAINING ISSUES

Based on our finding Quicken did not violate the attorney preference statute, we decline to address its remaining arguments.

**582See Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc., 335 S.C. 598, 613, 518 S.E.2d 591, 598 (1999) (stating an appellate court need not address remaining issues when a decision on a prior issue is dispositive).

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, the order on appeal is

REVERSED.

HUFF and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.