Case Name: CHARLESTON HOUSEWRECKING COMPANY, INC., Respondent, v. CANADIAN UNIVERSAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1984-08-15
Citations: 282 S.C. 443
Docket Number: 22156
Parties: CHARLESTON HOUSEWRECKING COMPANY, INC., Respondent, v. CANADIAN UNIVERSAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 282
Pages: 443–444

Head Matter:
22156
CHARLESTON HOUSEWRECKING COMPANY, INC., Respondent, v. CANADIAN UNIVERSAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant.
(319 S. E. (2d) 338)
Supreme Court
Joseph R. Young, of Young, Clement, Rivers & Tisdale, Charleston, for appellant.
B. C. Killough, Charleston, for respondent.
Submitted June 14, 1984.
Decided Aug. 15, 1984.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
Appellant, Canadian Universal Insurance Company asserts the trial court erroneously denied its motion for summary judgment, contending it had no duty to defend respondent, Charleston Housewrecking Company, in an action for damages instituted by a third party.
We find appellant's sole exception to be in violation of Supreme Court Rule 4, § 6, as it does not contain a complete assignment of error. "This defect is sufficient to warrant dismissal of this appeal." Simmons v. Johnson, 279 S. C. 146, 303 S. E. (2d) 101, 102 (1983).
Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for failure to comply with Supreme Court Rule 4, § 6.