Pallares v. Seinar
South Carolina Supreme Court
756 S.E.2d 128 (2014)
- Written by Brianna Pine, JD
Facts
Ursula Pallares (plaintiff) lived in the Shandon/Rosewood area of Columbia, South Carolina, near Sharon Seinar and Lisa Maseng (the neighbors) (defendants). Pallares alleged that the neighbors weaponized the legal system in order to drive her from her home. Specifically, she claimed they filed baseless code-violation complaints, instigated groundless criminal charges, petitioned for her involuntary mental commitment without legal authority, and sought restraining orders against her. Pallares filed suit against the neighbors, asserting, among other claims, malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Pallares submitted an affidavit from another neighbor who stated that she heard the neighbors make derogatory remarks about Pallares’s ethnicity and express a desire to have her removed from the neighborhood. The neighbors moved for summary judgment on these claims. The trial court granted the motion, finding that there was probable cause supporting one or more of the neighbors’ complaints. Pallares appealed. The South Carolina Supreme Court granted review.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Beatty, J.)
Concurrence (Kittredge, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Toal, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

