Couram v. Tidwell

2 Citing cases

  1. Couram v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.

    No. 2022-MO-009 (S.C. Oct. 5, 2022)

    The court of appeals reversed the judgment entered on that verdict on the ground the trial judge should not have directed a verdict as to punitive damages, and remanded for a new trial. Couram v. Tidwell, 2021-UP-367 (S.C. Ct. App. Oct. 27, 2021). We granted Tidwell's petition for a writ of certiorari in that case, dispensed with briefing, and affirmed as modified, clarifying that the case was remanded for a new trial only as to punitive damages.

  2. Couram v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.

    No. 2021-UP-373 (S.C. Ct. App. Nov. 3, 2021)   Cited 1 times

    In light of our recent opinion in Couram v. Tidwell, Op. No. 2021-UP-367 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Oct. 27, 2021), Couram's present action is not barred by the doctrine of res judicata or collateral estoppel because a final judgment on the merits does not exist. See Riedman Corp. v. Greenville Steel Structures, Inc., 308 S.C. 467, 469, 419 S.E.2d 217, 218 (1992) ("To establish res judicata, three elements must be shown: (1) identity of the parties; (2) identity of the subject matter; and (3) adjudication of the issue in the former suit."); Carolina Renewal, Inc. v. S.C. Dep't of Transp., 385 S.C. 550, 554, 674 S.E.2d 779, 782 (Ct. App. 2009) ("Collateral estoppel, also known as issue preclusion, prevents a party from relitigating an issue that was decided in a previous action, regardless of whether the claims in the first and subsequent lawsuits are the same.").