Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Columbia Outdoor Advertising, Inc. J. Willis Cantey the City of Columbia

How courts have described this case

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

• ruling that the plaintiff could not argue in its second appeal that it was entitled to a new trial based on a theory of liability that it could have, but did not, assert in its first appeal
• noting that claims for civil conspiracy are governed by § 15-3-530(5) which sets a three-year statute of limitations
• holding the UTPA does not apply to \an unfair or deceptive act or practice that affects only the parties to a trade or commercial transaction\
• “[N]othing in the federal rules encourages a plaintiff to delay bringing causes of action until the plaintiff’s ‘better’ claim is resolved.”
• finding delay when the new theories put forth by plaintiff “were available to [plaintiff] when it first brought [the] lawsuit”
• issues not raised on first appeal will be considered waived and cannot be raised in a subsequent appeal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).