Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 6/5/2006
Doe v. Roe
Citations
- 631 S.E.2d 317
- 369 S.C. 351
- 2006 S.C. App. LEXIS 122
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- providing that an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the family court to be preserved for appellate review
- providing that an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the family court to be preserved for appellate review
- noting that the best interest of the child is the ultimate consideration
- noting that the best interest of the child is the ultimate consideration
- stating an issue must be both raised to and ruled upon by the family court in order to be preserved for appellate review
- \An issue is not preserved where the trial court does not explicitly rule on an argument and the appellant does not make a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment.\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Anderson, Hearn, Goolsby
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Nicholson v. NicholsonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2008-06-06· cited 22×
- Adoptive Couple v. Baby GirlSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2012-07-26· cited 18×
- McCann v. DoeSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2008-04-07· cited 16×
- Semken v. SemkenCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2008-07-08· cited 15×
- Roe v. ReevesSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2011-05-02· cited 7×
- Brown v. Baby Girl HarperSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2014-09-29· cited 6×
- Thornton v. ThorntonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2019-10-02
- Jackson v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2020-12-02
- Weller v. WellerCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2021-08-04
Cites
33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1972-04-03· cited 5,889×
- Lehr v. RobertsonSupreme Court· 1983-06-27· cited 1,333×
- Caban v. MohammedSupreme Court· 1979-04-24· cited 738×
- I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. PleasantSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2000-01-17· cited 485×
- Joiner Ex Rel. Rivas v. RivasSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2000-08-15· cited 112×
- Ellie, Inc. v. MiccichiCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-02-02· cited 110×
- In Re Baby Girl EasonSupreme Court of Georgia· 1987-07-23· cited 84×
- Bowers v. BowersCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2002-02-25· cited 80×
- Austin v. Specialty Transportation Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-03-29· cited 74×
- Dearybury v. DearyburySupreme Court of South Carolina· 2002-08-26· cited 64×
- Lucas v. RAWL FAMILY LTD. PARTNERSHIPSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2004-05-03· cited 63×
- Badeaux v. DavisCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1999-09-20· cited 55×
- Patel v. PatelSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2001-10-31· cited 52×
- Murdock v. MurdockCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1999-12-20· cited 50×
- South Carolina Department of Social Services v. CummingsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2001-04-30· cited 49×
- Emery v. SmithCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-09-27· cited 48×
- Hawkins v. MullinsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2004-06-07· cited 43×
- Terrazas v. RiggsCourt of Appeals of Tennessee· 1980-07-29· cited 39×
- Lanier v. LanierCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2005-03-21· cited 38×
- Nasser-Moghaddassi v. MoghaddassiCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 2005-01-31· cited 37×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.