Hill v. Norman ( 2013 )

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
Adam Hill, Jr., Appellant,
v.
Henrietta Norman and Primerica Life Insurance
Company, Defendants,
Of whom Henrietta Norman is the Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2010-177326
Appeal From Greenwood County
Eugene C. Griffith, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-206
Submitted April 1, 2013 – Filed May 22, 2013
AFFIRMED
Adam Hill, Jr., of Anniston, AL, pro se.
Edward S. McCallum, III, of the Law Offices of Edward
S. McCallum, III, of Greenwood, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Rule 56(c), SCRCP (stating the trial court should grant summary
judgment "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions
on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to
any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of
law"); Carolina Alliance for Fair Employment v. S.C. Dep't of Labor, Licensing, &
Regulation, 337 S.C. 476, 485, 523 S.E.2d 795, 800 (Ct. App. 1999) ("The plain
language of Rule 56(c), SCRCP, mandates the entry of summary judgment, after
adequate time for discovery against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient
to establish the existence of an element essential to the party's case and on which
that party will bear the burden of proof at trial."); Hedgepath v. AT&T, 348 S.C.
340, 355, 559 S.E.2d 327, 336 (Ct. App. 2001) ("[W]hen plain, palpable, and
indisputable facts exist on which reasonable minds cannot differ, summary
judgment should be granted."); id. at 354, 559 S.E.2d at 335 ("Once the moving
party carries its initial burden, the opposing party must . . . do more than simply
show that there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts[;] [the opposing
party] must come forward with specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue
for trial." (internal quotation marks, emphasis, and citation omitted)).
AFFIRMED.1
FEW, C.J., and GEATHERS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.