Player v. Thompson
South Carolina Supreme Court
193 S.E.2d 531 (1972)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Nancy Carder (codefendant) borrowed a car from Geraldine Thompson (codefendant). Diane Player (plaintiff), a passenger in the car, was injured when the car skidded on wet pavement. Player sued Carder and Thompson, alleging both knew or should have known the car's tires were bald. According to Carder's pretrial statement, a few weeks before the accident she and Thompson took the car for state inspection. Carder heard the inspector tell Thompson, and Thompson told Carder, that the car failed inspection because it needed new tires. Player conceded this statement was not relevant as to Thompson. Player therefore proffered the statement stripped of any reference to Thompson, and only as it related to Carder. The trial judge excluded the statement because, among other things, it was hearsay that prejudiced Thompson. Player also sought permission to question Carder about the state inspection incident, to show that both Carder and Thompson had notice of the bald tires. Once again, the judge ruled this would be inadmissible hearsay. The trial ended in nonsuit. Player appealed to the Supreme Court of South Carolina, arguing the judge erred in his hearsay rulings.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per Curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
