Huntley v. Young
Cases that cite this one
21 later published cases cite this decision.
- Kiriakides v. Atlas Food Systems & Services, Inc. (S.C. Ct. App. 2000)
- Mitchell v. Helwig (S.C. Ct. App. 2013)
- Bruce Wilson v. Rueban Hays (S.C. Ct. App. 2025)
- Henry v. Prospera Financial Services, Inc (District Court, D. South Carolina 2024)
- Raymond A. Wedlake v. Board of Directors of Woodington Homeowners' Association, Inc. (S.C. Ct. App. 2022)
- Wilson v. Gandis (S.C. 2020)
- Patterson v. Witter (S.C. 2016)
- Watson v. Underwood (S.C. Ct. App. 2014)
- Burkey v. Noce (S.C. Ct. App. 2012)
- Bessinger v. Bi-Lo, Inc. (S.C. Ct. App. 2005)
- Brown v. Spartanburg County (S.C. Ct. App. 2003)
- Ferguson v. Charleston Lincoln Mercury, Inc. (S.C. 2002)
- In re Greenwood Supply Co. (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina 2002)
- Brown Ex Rel. Estate of Brown v. Stewart (S.C. Ct. App. 2001)
- Ferguson v. Charleston Lincoln/Mercury, Inc. (S.C. Ct. App. 2001)
- Tench v. South Carolina Department of Education (S.C. 2001)
- Allied Investment Corp. v. Jasen (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1998)
- McDuffie v. O'NEAL (S.C. Ct. App. 1996)
- Matthew Burgess v. Lamoille Housing Partnership, Town of Morristown, Mary Ann Wilson as Collector of Taxes and Sharon Green, Esq. (Vt. 2016)
- Charles R. Gray v. Riso Kagaku Corporation, Riso, Incorporated (4th Cir. 1996)
- Gray v. Riso Kagaku Corp (4th Cir. 1996)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP, motion to dismiss all nine causes of action alleged in respondents’ complaint. Although generally the denial of Rule 12(b)(6) motion is not directly appealable, we have allowed an appeal in cases such as this where the issue is whether a claim is properly asserted as a direct action or as a shareholder’s derivative action. Compare Moyd v. Johnson, 289 S.C. 482, 347 S.E. (2d) 97 (1986) with Hite v. Thomas & Howard Co., 305 S.C. 358, 409 S.E. (2d) 340 (1991). We now reconsider Hite, and overrule it to the extent it holds this type of order is directly appealable.
The denial of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion does not establish the law of the case nor does it preclude a party from raising the issue at a later point or points in the case. Since the order denying the Rule 12(b)(6) motion does not finally decide any issue, it is not directly appealable. See McLendon v. South Carolina Dept. of Highways and Public Transportation, 313 S.C. 525, 443 S.E. (2d) 539 (1994).
Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees. This appeal is
Dismissed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.