SC · rules
SCRCP 72
Judgments and Orders Subject to Appeal
Appeal may be taken, as provided by law, from any final judgment or appealable order.
Note:
This Rule 72 parallels, in part, S.C. Code § 14-3-330, but is designed to reduce appeals
from interlocutory or intermediate orders in an action. It accords with the modern
decisions of the Supreme Court narrowing "dilatory appeals" from such interlocutory
orders as grant or deny motions addressed to the pleadings, motions at trial, and the
like. All such questions are left to the appeal from final judgment or order of dismissal.
There is no conflict with the Supreme Court jurisdictional statutes and all statutory
rights to appeal are preserved specifically by subdivision (6).
Note to 1989 Amendment:
The jurisdiction of all courts is determined by the Constitution, the jurisdictional
statutes, and the case law interpreting those provisions. Rule 72 as originally written
created confusion and unintended arguments that the civil rules changed the scope of
appeal. Rule 72 was not intended to alter, amend or supercede previously existing law
concerning appeals. The amendment rephrases Rule 72 as a general statement that
appeals are as provided by law, and is consistent with Rule 73 which states that the
procedure on appeal is governed by the Rules of the Supreme Court.
Article V, § 5, of the Constitution sets forth the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Some of the relevant statutes are § 14-3-320 (equitable matters); § 14-3-330 (matters
of law); § 17-17-140 (habeas corpus). Some of the important cases are: North Carolina
Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n v. Twin States Dev. Corp., 289 S.C. 480, 347 S.E.2d 97
(1986) (§ 14-3-330 controls appeals not Rule 72); Coleman v. Keels, 30 S.C. 614, 9 S.E.
270 (1889) (certiorari); Ex parte Mackey, 15 S.C. 322 (1880) (mandamus); Southern
Railway Co. v. Coltex, 285 S.C. 213, 329 S.E.2d 736 (1985) (new trial because of error of
law); Simms v. Phillips, 46 S.C. 149, 24 S.E. 87 (1896) (subject matter jurisdiction); Nat.
Exchange Bank v. Stelling, 32 S.C. 102, 10 S.E. 766 (1890) (personal jurisdiction); Godley
v. Uniroyal, Inc., 278 S.C. 571, 300 S.E.2d 78 (1983) (venue not immediately
appealable).
Provenance
- Source
- www.sccourts.org
- Retrieved
- 2026-10-02
- Edition
- supplied-sc-01-print-version-2026-10-02
- Content hash
6a6ae2a7938e0ca037cb3512daa3c1b1878831968e440a89efd647434120caa8
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.