Title: Dunn v. Charleston Coca-Cola Bottling
Citation: 426 S.E.2d 756
Docket Number: 23777
State: south-carolina
Issuer: south-carolina Supreme Court
Date: January 11, 1993

426 S.E.2d 756 (1993) Albert B. DUNN, Respondent, v. CHARLESTON COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY and Sun-Belt Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Inc., Petitioners. No. 23777. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Heard November 16, 1992. Decided January 11, 1993. *757 K. Lindsay Terrell, of Howell, Gibson and Hughes, P.A., Beaufort, for petitioners. John E. Parker, of Peters, Murdaugh, Parker, Eltzroth &amp; Detrick, P.A., Hampton, for respondent. PER CURIAM: We granted certiorari to review the Court of Appeals' decision reported at ___ S.C. ___, 415 S.E.2d 590 (Ct.App.1992). We reverse. The sole issue here is whether the trial court erred in granting plaintiff's request for a voir dire inquiry of the jury panel, as follows: A two-judge majority of the Court of Appeals held that Petitioners (Coke) had waived objection to the mention of insurance by failing to move for a mistrial and failing to state grounds for an objection. Additionally, the majority found no prejudice to Coke due to the context in which insurance was mentioned. The dissenting opinion of Acting Judge, Bruce Littlejohn, found (1) that the inquiry was inherently prejudicial and (2) that Coke's request that the voir dire question "not be charged" constituted a proper objection. We agree and find the dissent dispositive of the issues. Accordingly, it is adopted in full as the opinion of this Court: REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL.