 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
TAYLOR v. MEDENICA11/12/1996
viewed by the trial judge, and review by this Court is limited).
XIII.
The Taylors argue the trial court erred by dismissing their children's action for loss of consortium. They agree there is no South Carolina precedent to support a child's cause of action for loss of parental consortium, but argue the Court should allow this claim. We disagree.
By enacting S.C. Code Ann. ยง 15-75-20 (1977), the legislature provided for loss of consortium actions for spouses. The statute has not been amended to provide a similar cause of action for children. Whether South Carolina should recognize a cause of action for loss of parental consortium is a matter best left to the discretion of the General Assembly.
CONCLUSION
In accordance with the rulings above, this matter is affirmed in part, reversed on the issue of election of remedies, and remanded. A judgment of $36,242 actual damages under the UTPA shall be entered against CIBL. Since the trial judge has already ruled the violation of the UTPA was willful, the actual damages should be trebled. Finally, the trial court shall consider Mrs. Taylor's application for attorney's fees and costs from the date on which she filed her second amended complaint alleging a violation of the UTPA.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.
MOORE, A.C.J., and WALLER, A.J., L. CASEY MANNING and JAMES
W. JOHNSON, Jr., Acting Associate Justices concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 South Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|