Articles Worth Reading

For your information needs and reading pleasure, check out the following articles:

  1. Are ‘Digital’ and ‘Privacy’ Really Mutually Exclusive?
  2. Building Relationships Beyond Your Campus
  3. Breaking Into BigLaw Without A BigLaw Resume
  4. Companies Seeking Next-Generation Office Space to Attract, Retain Millennials
  5. Congress Approves Bill Allowing Families of Sept. 11 Victims to Sue Saudi Arabia
  6. Essential Research Skills for New Attorneys: A Survey of Academic and Practitioner Law Librarians
  7. Everyone Fails, but Only the Wise Find Humility
  8. How Artificial Intelligence is Already Transforming Legal Services
  9. Facing a bias suit and criticism, Airbnb takes steps to curb discrimination by its hosts
  10. Five Laws and Regulations That Emerged From 9/11
  11. How to Recognize and Prevent Lawyer Burnout
  12. How We Can Diversify The Legal Profession And Why We Must
  13. Leveraging Trial Strategies To Improve Your Negotiating Skills
  14. Martindale-Hubbell, Nolo Launch Legal Marketing Network
  15. Succeeding with Millennial Jurors Requires Understanding Their Generational Traits
  16. The Competitive Advantage of Long-Tail Keywords
  17. Typos Stage A Resurgence As Attys Turn To Document Makers
  18. United States Treaties Added to the Law Library Website
  19. Think word-of-mouth marketing is enough? Think again
  20. Will I Pass the Bar Exam?: Predicting Student Success Using LSAT Scores and Law School Performance


Happy Reading!



Posted in Articles Worth Reading, Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Book Exchange, LowCountry Digital Collection, HeinOnline’s UNC Press Law Publications, and Articles Worth Reading


The library has a Book Exchange in the reading room area, across from the Reference office.  At this site, faculty, staff, students, alumni, and members of the Bench & Bar can take any of the books that are located in the shelves marked free copies. We ask only that you leave a book that you no longer want or need when taking an item, i.e. the Book Exchange.  Titles include fiction and non-fiction legal materials such as discarded or out of date editions of hornbooks, nutshells, and casebooks.  Stop by and browse.

Check out the LowCountry Digital Library here.  This site includes many low country libraries, museums, and resources as partners .  These organizations digitized their special collections to make them widely available to the public.  A selection of partners includes the following organizations:  Charleston County Public Library, Charleston Library Society, The Citadel, College of Charleston, Gibbes Museum and South Carolina Historical Society.  This digital library provides access to books, documents, images, manuscripts, maps, pamphlets and postcards that are unique to the low country.  Materials can be browsed by the type of collection, the type of media digitized, or the institution that digitized the collection.  Samples include the College of Charleston’s Avery Research Center for African American History and Culture  or the Grimke Family Papers which perhaps inspired Sue Monk Kidd’s The Invention of Wings.

HeinOnline recently added a new resource to its library:  selected titles from UNC Press Law Publications.  Over 116 titles can be found, in alphabetical order.  You can search the full text of titles via keyword.  With the advanced search feature, you can search by author or title.  Publications available are both recent (2015) and much earlier (1957.)

The library is also selecting and publishing selected articles on legal education, law office management, the legal industry, and other relevant legal information.  These articles are available both in print, adjacent to the library’s Circulation Desk, and electronically via the Barrister blog under the title, Articles Worth Reading.



Posted in Articles Worth Reading, Library Resources, Library service | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

South Carolina Court of Appeals’ Opinions

On Wednesday, September 7th, the South Carolina Court of Appeals published SCDOR v. Meenaxi, Inc. Menaxi, Inc. (Appellant) appealed the administrative law cout’s (ALC’s) order affirming the SC Department of Revenue’s revocation of an off premises beer and wine permit that allowed alcohol to be sole at the Corner Mart.

On appeal,  Appellant argued (1) the ALC erred in determining the Department brought and pursued this action against the proper parties; (2) the Department’s failure to bring and pursue this case against the proper parties violated the due process rights of Malkesh Patel?the owner of Meenaxi, Inc. and the Corner Mart; (3) the ALC erred in revoking Appellant’s permit pursuant to subsection 61-4-580(5) of the South Carolina Code (2009); (4) the ALC’s factual findings and legal conclusions were based upon erroneously admitted testimony and evidence; and (5) the ALC abused its discretion and committed an error of law by determining that revocation of the permit was the appropriate penalty  The Court affirmed the finding of the ALC on all issues.

On August 31st, the Court of Appeals published The Gates at Williams-Brice v. DDC Construction. In the circuit court denied the Defendant Developers (Developers) motion for a nonjury trial and s to strike the class action allegation of Katharine Swinson and all others similarly situated, and the Gates at Williams-Brice Condominium Association (collectively ‘Homeowners”)  This Court reversed the denial of Developers’ motion for a nonjury trial and to strike Homeowners’ class action allegations.  The Court of Appeals concluded Developers timely raise the mode of trial issues to the circuit court, and therefore, it was an errot to find Developer’s motion untimely.

The Court further held Homeowners could not retroactively amend the master deed to remove the jury trial and class action waivers and found Homeowners voluntarily and knowingly waived their rights, which were conspicuously and unambiguously set forth in the master deed.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Articles Worth Reading


For your reading pleasure and information needs, check out the following articles:

  1. 4 Ways to Avoid An Attorney-Client Communication Disaster;
  2. 5 Conversations Lawyers Should Avoid at Work;
  3. 5 Extracurriculars That Can Help You Be a Better Lawyer;
  4. 5 Ways Firms Are Stuck in the Past;
  5. 12 Additions to My List of Legal Startups;
  6. A New Wave of Legal Rebels;
  7. Building a Portfolio of Court Cases the Way a Quantitative Hedge Fund Buys Stock;
  8. From BigLaw to Your Own Firm:  4 Tips for Legal Startups;
  9. Law Firm Uses Speed-Dating Approach to Law Student Interviews;
  10. Legalist Uses Analytics to Target Market Opportunity in Litigation Financing;
  11. Mary Shen O’Carroll:  Googling Up Law Department Efficiency;
  12. Stop Multitasking;
  13. The F-Word is Making More Frequent Appearances in Appellate Opinions;
  14. The Importance of Knowing the Competencies that Employers Seek;
  15. Tips from the Top:  How to Succeed in Law School Because It Will Be Trying;
  16. What Keeps Lawyers from Being Happy; and
  17. William C. Hubbard:  A President Presses Buttons .

Happy reading!

Posted in Articles Worth Reading, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Library Closed Friday, 9/2, Because of Hurricane Hermine


On Friday, September 2nd, the Sol Blatt Jr. Law Library, along with the Charleston School of Law, will be closed because of anticipated inclement weather from Hurricane Hermine. The library is scheduled to re-open at its regular operating time, 10:00 a.m., on Saturday, September 3rd.  Stay safe & dry!

Posted in Library hours, Weather Closure | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Library Hours & Labor Day Weekend


The Sol Blatt Jr. Law Library will be open the following hours for the Labor Day weekend:

Friday, September 2nd, 7:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. ;

Saturday, September 3rd, 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. ;

Sunday, September 4th, Noon to Midnight ; and

Monday, September 5th, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Study Hall only, Staffed by CSOL Security.

Posted in Library hours | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Opinions from the South Carolina Supreme Court

125px-SCSupreme_CourtSealOn August 24th, the South Carolina Supreme Court published seven opinions:

In the Matter of Spero C. Keretses and In the Matter of Eric G. Fosmire, the Court publically reprimands named attorneys for misconduct.

In the Matter of Joenathan Shelly Chaplin and In the Matter of Abigail P. Allocco, the Court suspends named attorneys and imposes other requirements.

In the Matter of George Thomas Samaha, III and In the Matter of Matthew Jeffrey Lester, the Court disbars named attorneys from the practice of law in this state.

Allegro v. Scully, Allegro, Inc (“Allegro”)  brought this suit seeking damages resulting from Emmitt Scully’s (“Scully”) departure from Allegro, in order to form a competing company with former Allegro employees.  The jury returned a verdict in favor of Allegro on all claims of civil conspiracy, breach of contract and breach of contract accompanied by a fraudulent act.  Petitioners, all former employees, moved for JNOV on all causes of action which the trial court denied. The court of appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial.

This Court addressed only whether the three claims should be included in the remand. The Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ finding and held that the trial court erred in denying the petitioners’ motions for a directed verdict on the claims of civil conspiracy, breach of contract, and breach of contract accompanied by a fraudulent act. Further, the Court reasoned that  those causes of action should have never been submitted to the jury because there were no material terms provided or alleged to find a contract on which Allegro can predicate its claims of breach of contract and breach of  contract accompanied by a fraudulent act.  Accordingly, the Court reversed the appellate court’s  decision and dismissed those causes of action and remanded for trial the remaining causes of actions.

On August 17th, the Court published two opinions:

In State v. Rearick, Appellant moved to bar subsequent prosecution on the charge of felony driving under the influence resulting in death on the ground a second trial would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. This appeal was  following the circuit court’s judge’s declaration of a mistrial over defense counsel’s objection. This Court dismissed the appeal without prejudice as interlocutory.

In Parsons v. John Wieland Homes, the Court reversed the court of appeals’ finding  that because the arbitration clause was located within the Warranty, its scope was limited to the terms of the Warranty and therefore unenforceable in this matter. Additionally, the majority of the Court would have ruled that the outrageous torts exception doctrine survives, contrary to the holding stated in the “majority” opinion.

Justice Hearn and Justice Beatty concurred in part and dissented in part in a separate opinion.  Acting Justice Toal dissented in a separate opinion.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment