Hancock v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that an issue not addressed in the trial court's order was not preserved for appellate review because the appellant did not file a motion under Rule 59(e) seeking a ruling on the issue
• concluding that an issue not addressed in the trial court's order was not preserved for appellate review because the appellant did not file a motion under Rule 59(e), SCRCP, seeking a ruling on the issue
• holding that an argument raised to the trial court but not addressed in the final order is not preserved for appellate review when the appellant fails to file a Rule 59(e), SCRCP motion to alter or amend
• holding that even though the appellant raised an argument before the family court, it was not preserved because it was not addressed in the court's final order and the appellant did not file a motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e
• holding that even though the appellant raised an argument before the family court, it was not preserved because it was not addressed in the court's final order and the appellant did not file a motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e
• concluding an issue not addressed in the circuit court's final order on summary judgment was not preserved for appellate review when the appellant did not file a motion under Rule 59(e) seeking a ruling on the issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).