From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Roe v. Bibby

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court
Aug 10, 2016
789 S.E.2d 752 (S.C. 2016)

Opinion

Appellate Case No. 2014–002500 Opinion No. 27652

08-10-2016

Jane Roe, as parent and natural guardian of Judy Roe, James Roe, and Joyce Roe, Minor Children Under the Age of Eighteen, (18), Petitioners, v. Daniel Bibby Sr. and Michelle Bibby, Defendants, Of Whom Michelle Bibby is the Respondent.

Eric M. Poulin, of Anastopoulo Law Firm, LLC, of Charleston, for Petitioners. Eugene P. Corrigan, III and J.W. Nelson Chandler, both of Corrigan & Chandler, LLC, of Charleston, for Respondent.


Eric M. Poulin, of Anastopoulo Law Firm, LLC, of Charleston, for Petitioners.

Eugene P. Corrigan, III and J.W. Nelson Chandler, both of Corrigan & Chandler, LLC, of Charleston, for Respondent.

Opinion

PER CURIAM: We granted certiorari to review the court of appeals' decision in Roe v. Bibby , 410 S.C. 287, 763 S.E.2d 645 (Ct. App. 2014). We now dismiss the writ as improvidently granted.

DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED. PLEICONES, C.J., BEATTY, KITTREDGE, HEARN, JJ., and Acting Justice Jean H. Toal, concur.


Summaries of

Roe v. Bibby

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court
Aug 10, 2016
789 S.E.2d 752 (S.C. 2016)
Case details for

Roe v. Bibby

Case Details

Full title:Jane Roe, as parent and natural guardian of Judy Roe, James Roe, and Joyce…

Court:STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Supreme Court

Date published: Aug 10, 2016

Citations

789 S.E.2d 752 (S.C. 2016)
417 S.C. 117