Court Opinion

ID: 9561116
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:03:41.942662+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:38.044174
License: Public Domain

Bussey, Justice
(dissenting) :
Being of the view that the judgment of the lower court should be affirmed, as rendered, I, in part, most respectfully dissent.
I think this case is clearly distinguishable from Gray v. Laurens Mills, et al., 231 S. C. 488, 99 S. E. (2d) 36, the cases therein cited, and Mize v. Sangomo Elec. Co., 246 S. C. 307, 143 S. E. (2d) 590, which followed the Gray case. Here the employer, an individual, was on the job site when claimant was injured and admittedly had actual knowledge of the accident and injury by virtue of the immediate oral report to him by the employee. Substantially in point factually, and therefore in my view controlling, are the decisions of this court in Buggs v. United States Rubber Co., 201 S. C. 281, 22 S. E. (2d) 881; Strawhorn v. J. A. Chapman Const. Co., 202 S. C. 43, 24 S. E. (2d) 116; Raley v. City of Camden, 222 S. C. 303, 72 S. E. (2d) 572; and Ricker v. Village Management Corp., 231 S. C. 47, 97 S. E. (2d) 83.