Medical Malpractice Complaint - South Carolina

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE COMPLAINT — SOUTH CAROLINA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Pre-Filing Verification Checklist
2. Caption and Jurisdictional Allegations
3. Parties
4. Jurisdiction and Venue
5. Compliance with Pre-Suit Requirements
6. Statute of Limitations Compliance
7. Factual Allegations
8. Count One — Medical Negligence (Provider)
9. Count Two — Negligence (Institutional / Vicarious)
10. Count Three — Negligent Hiring, Credentialing, Supervision
11. Count Four — Lack of Informed Consent
12. Count Five — Wrongful Death and Survival (if applicable)
13. Count Six — Punitive Damages
14. Damages
15. Cap Inapplicability — Pleaded in the Alternative
16. Prayer for Relief
17. Jury Demand
18. Verification and Counsel Signature
19. Required Exhibits
20. South Carolina Practice Notes
21. Sources and References

1. PRE-FILING VERIFICATION CHECKLIST

• ☐ NOI filed and served on each defendant (§ 15-79-125(A))
• ☐ Expert affidavit filed contemporaneously with NOI (§§ 15-36-100, 15-79-125)
• ☐ Mandatory pre-litigation mediation completed (§ 15-79-125(D))
• ☐ Mediator's declaration of impasse / non-viability / termination obtained
• ☐ Statute of limitations and 6-year repose calendared and verified
• ☐ Original (tolled) SOL expiration date confirmed
• ☐ 60-day post-mediation filing deadline confirmed (§ 15-79-125(E))
• ☐ Venue analysis completed (§ 15-7-30)
• ☐ Insurance coverage / carriers identified
• ☐ Updated expert affidavit prepared for filing as Exhibit A
• ☐ Counsel admitted in SC and in good standing
• ☐ Filing fee, summons, and case-coversheet ready
• ☐ Service plan finalized (registered agents identified)

2. CAPTION AND JURISDICTIONAL ALLEGATIONS

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF [_____________________]
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
[NTH] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

Civil Action No.: [______________]

COMPLAINT
(Medical Malpractice — Jury Trial Demanded)

3. PARTIES

3.1. Plaintiff [NAME] is a citizen and resident of [COUNTY] County, South Carolina, residing at [ADDRESS].

3.2. [If wrongful death/survival]: Plaintiff [NAME] is the duly appointed Personal Representative of the Estate of [DECEDENT NAME], pursuant to Letters of Administration issued by the [COUNTY] County Probate Court on [__/__/____], Case No. [______________], and brings this action pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §§ 15-51-10 et seq. (wrongful death) and 15-5-90 (survival).

3.3. Defendant [PROVIDER NAME 1], M.D., is, on information and belief, a physician licensed to practice medicine in South Carolina, with a principal place of practice at [ADDRESS], [COUNTY] County, and is a "health care provider" as defined in S.C. Code Ann. § 15-79-110(1).

3.4. Defendant [PROVIDER NAME 2], M.D., is, on information and belief, a physician licensed to practice medicine in South Carolina, with a principal place of practice at [ADDRESS], [COUNTY] County, and is a "health care provider" as defined in § 15-79-110(1).

3.5. Defendant [INSTITUTION NAME] is, on information and belief, a [hospital / ambulatory surgical facility / nursing home / etc.] licensed under the laws of South Carolina, with its principal place of operation at [ADDRESS], [COUNTY] County, and is a "health care institution" as defined in § 15-79-110(2). Its registered agent for service is [NAME, ADDRESS].

3.6. [Add additional defendants — nursing staff, anesthesiologists, consulting physicians, employers, contractors, parent corporations.]

3.7. At all times relevant to this action, each individual Defendant was acting [within the course and scope of employment / as an actual or apparent agent / as a credentialed staff member] of Defendant Institution, such that Defendant Institution is vicariously liable under the doctrines of respondeat superior and/or apparent agency for the acts and omissions of its agents and employees.

4. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4.1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to S.C. Const. Art. V, § 11, and S.C. Code Ann. § 14-5-310 (jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas).

4.2. The amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional minimum of the magistrate's court and properly invokes the Court of Common Pleas' general civil jurisdiction.

4.3. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County under S.C. Code Ann. § 15-7-30 because:

• ☐ One or more Defendants reside or maintain a principal place of practice / operation in [COUNTY] County; AND/OR
• ☐ The most substantial part of the alleged acts and omissions giving rise to the cause of action occurred in [COUNTY] County; AND/OR
• ☐ Plaintiff received the medical care at issue at Defendant Institution's facility in [COUNTY] County.

5. COMPLIANCE WITH PRE-SUIT REQUIREMENTS

5.1. Plaintiff has fully complied with all pre-suit requirements imposed by S.C. Code Ann. § 15-79-125 prior to filing this Complaint.

5.2. Notice of Intent to File Suit. On [__/__/____], Plaintiff filed a Notice of Intent to File Suit in the [COUNTY] County Court of Common Pleas, naming each Defendant herein as an adverse party. The NOI was duly served on each Defendant on or about [__/__/____].

5.3. Affidavit of Expert Witness. Contemporaneously with the NOI, Plaintiff filed an Affidavit of [EXPERT NAME, M.D./D.O./Ph.D.], conforming to the requirements of S.C. Code Ann. § 15-36-100. An updated and supplemental Affidavit is filed concurrently herewith and attached as Exhibit A.

5.4. Mandatory Pre-Litigation Mediation. A mediation conference was conducted on [__/__/____] before [MEDIATOR NAME], a certified mediator under the South Carolina ADR Rules, in accordance with § 15-79-125(D).

5.5. Mediator's Declaration. On [__/__/____], the mediator declared that the matter could not be resolved through mediation, that an impasse existed, and/or that mediation should end (§ 15-79-125(E)).

5.6. Timeliness of this Complaint. This Complaint is filed within sixty (60) days of the mediator's declaration referenced in Paragraph 5.5, or before expiration of the original statute of limitations as tolled by the NOI under § 15-79-125(A), whichever is later.

6. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS COMPLIANCE

6.1. The acts and omissions giving rise to this action occurred between [__/__/____] and [__/__/____].

6.2. Discovery date. The injury caused by Defendants' negligence was first discovered, or reasonably should have been discovered, by Plaintiff on or about [__/__/____].

6.3. NOI tolling. Plaintiff filed the Notice of Intent to File Suit on [__/__/____], which tolls all applicable statutes of limitations under § 15-79-125(A).

6.4. Three-year limit (§ 15-3-545(A)). This action is commenced within three (3) years from the later of the act/omission or the date of discovery, after accounting for NOI tolling.

6.5. Six-year repose (§ 15-3-545(A)). This action is commenced within six (6) years from the date of the negligent act or omission.

6.6. [If applicable] Foreign-object rule (§ 15-3-545(B)). This action involves a foreign object placed in Plaintiff's body, and is commenced within two (2) years from the date of discovery, in no event less than three (3) years from placement.

6.7. [If applicable] Minority tolling (§ 15-3-40). Plaintiff was a minor at the time of the negligent acts/omissions; the SOL is tolled accordingly, subject to the six-year repose.

7. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7.1. Initial Presentation. On [__/__/____], Plaintiff [describe presentation — e.g., "presented to Defendant Hospital's emergency department complaining of severe substernal chest pain radiating to the left arm, accompanied by diaphoresis and dyspnea, with a history of hypertension and family history of premature coronary artery disease"].

7.2. Initial Evaluation. Plaintiff was evaluated by Defendant [PROVIDER], who [describe history-taking, examination, ordering of studies — e.g., "ordered a single 12-lead EKG, a basic metabolic panel, and a single troponin level, but did not order a chest X-ray, did not order serial troponins, did not place Plaintiff on a cardiac monitor, and did not consult cardiology"].

7.3. Diagnostic Studies. The diagnostic studies obtained showed [describe findings — e.g., "EKG with non-specific T-wave inversions in V4-V6; troponin I of 0.08 ng/mL (above the institution's 99th-percentile upper reference limit of 0.04 ng/mL)"].

7.4. Failure to Recognize / Act. Defendant [PROVIDER] failed to [describe failure — e.g., "recognize the troponin elevation as evidence of myocardial injury, failed to obtain a repeat troponin per institutional protocol, and failed to admit Plaintiff for cardiac monitoring and serial enzymes"].

7.5. Discharge. Plaintiff was discharged from the emergency department at approximately [TIME] on [__/__/____] with a diagnosis of ["non-cardiac chest pain"] and instructions to follow up with primary care.

7.6. Subsequent Course. [Describe deterioration — e.g., "Approximately fourteen (14) hours after discharge, Plaintiff suffered a cardiac arrest at home, was transported by EMS to a different hospital, and was diagnosed with an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Despite emergent percutaneous coronary intervention, Plaintiff sustained substantial myocardial damage with a resulting ejection fraction of 25%."]

7.7. Permanent Injury. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' acts and omissions, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer [describe injury — e.g., "permanent cardiac dysfunction, including reduced ejection fraction, exertional intolerance, the need for lifelong cardiac medications, ICD implantation, and a substantially shortened life expectancy"].

7.8. [Add factual paragraphs as the case requires, e.g., institutional staffing/policy failures, failures of nursing escalation, hand-off failures, equipment failures.]

8. COUNT ONE — MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE (PROVIDER)

8.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 7 as if fully set forth herein.

8.2. Duty. Defendant [PROVIDER NAME] owed Plaintiff a duty of care to provide medical evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment in accordance with the standard of care of a reasonably prudent [specialty] physician practicing in the same or similar circumstances in South Carolina.

8.3. Breach. Defendant [PROVIDER NAME] breached the standard of care in one or more of the following respects, each of which constitutes "medical malpractice" within the meaning of S.C. Code Ann. § 15-79-110(6):

8.3.1. Failing to obtain a thorough history and physical examination consistent with Plaintiff's presenting complaints;
8.3.2. Failing to order indicated diagnostic studies, including [specific studies];
8.3.3. Failing to interpret or properly act upon abnormal study results, including [specific results];
8.3.4. Failing to obtain timely consultation from [specialty consultant];
8.3.5. Failing to admit Plaintiff for monitoring and further evaluation;
8.3.6. Discharging Plaintiff prematurely and without adequate follow-up arrangements;
8.3.7. [Add specific breaches as supported by the record and expert review.]

8.4. Causation. Each breach above is a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

8.5. Damages. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has suffered the damages enumerated in Section 14.

9. COUNT TWO — NEGLIGENCE (INSTITUTIONAL / VICARIOUS)

9.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 8 as if fully set forth herein.

9.2. Vicarious liability. Defendant [INSTITUTION NAME] is vicariously liable for the acts and omissions of Defendant [PROVIDER NAME] under the doctrine of respondeat superior, because at all relevant times Defendant [PROVIDER NAME] was acting within the course and scope of employment by Defendant Institution.

9.3. Apparent agency. In the alternative, Defendant [INSTITUTION] is liable under the doctrine of apparent agency because Defendant Institution held out Defendant [PROVIDER] as its agent through signage, advertising, billing arrangements, and the appearance of integrated services, and Plaintiff relied on that holding-out in seeking and accepting care at Defendant Institution's facility.

9.4. Direct institutional negligence. Defendant Institution was independently negligent in one or more of the following respects:

9.4.1. Failing to enforce its own policies and procedures regarding [specific protocol — e.g., "serial troponin testing in suspected acute coronary syndrome"];
9.4.2. Failing to maintain adequate staffing levels in the emergency department;
9.4.3. Failing to ensure adequate communication and handoff procedures between providers;
9.4.4. Failing to provide adequate training and supervision of nursing and ancillary staff;
9.4.5. [Add specific institutional failures.]

9.5. Causation and damages. Defendant Institution's acts and omissions are a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's damages.

10. COUNT THREE — NEGLIGENT HIRING, CREDENTIALING, SUPERVISION

10.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 9 as if fully set forth herein.

10.2. Duty. Defendant Institution had a duty to use reasonable care in hiring, credentialing, retaining, and supervising the physicians, nurses, and other clinicians granted privileges or employed at its facility.

10.3. Breach. Defendant Institution breached this duty by [describe — e.g., "granting and renewing privileges to Defendant [PROVIDER] despite [history of substantiated complaints / failed proctoring / disciplinary action / etc.] of which Defendant Institution knew or should have known through its credentialing process"].

10.4. Causation and damages. This negligence is a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's damages.

11. COUNT FOUR — LACK OF INFORMED CONSENT

11.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 10 as if fully set forth herein.

11.2. Duty. Defendant [PROVIDER] had a duty to disclose to Plaintiff the material risks, benefits, and alternatives of the [procedure / treatment / non-treatment decision] at issue, sufficient to enable Plaintiff to make an informed decision.

11.3. Breach. Defendant failed to disclose:

11.3.1. [Material risk #1 — e.g., the risk of bowel perforation associated with the procedure];
11.3.2. [Material risk #2];
11.3.3. [Reasonable alternative #1 — e.g., conservative management with close monitoring];
11.3.4. [Reasonable alternative #2].

11.4. Causation. Had a reasonable patient in Plaintiff's position been informed of the undisclosed risks and alternatives, that patient would not have consented to the procedure or treatment performed.

11.5. Damages. Plaintiff suffered the materialized risk and resulting injury enumerated in Section 14.

12. COUNT FIVE — WRONGFUL DEATH AND SURVIVAL (IF APPLICABLE)

12.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 11 as if fully set forth herein.

12.2. Wrongful death (§ 15-51-10 et seq.). As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' acts and omissions, [DECEDENT NAME] died on [__/__/____]. This action is brought by the duly appointed Personal Representative for the benefit of Decedent's statutory beneficiaries, including:

• ☐ [Spouse — name, age, relationship]
• ☐ [Children — names, ages]
• ☐ [Parents — names, ages]
• ☐ [Other statutory beneficiaries per § 15-51-20]

12.3. Wrongful death damages. The beneficiaries seek recovery for, inter alia:

• ☐ Pecuniary loss to the beneficiaries;
• ☐ Mental shock and suffering of the beneficiaries;
• ☐ Wounded feelings of the beneficiaries;
• ☐ Grief and sorrow of the beneficiaries;
• ☐ Loss of companionship, society, and comfort;
• ☐ Loss of experience, knowledge, and judgment of the Decedent;
• ☐ Loss of services to the beneficiaries.

12.4. Survival action (§ 15-5-90). The Estate further claims, on behalf of Decedent, all damages Decedent would have been entitled to recover had Decedent survived, including:

• ☐ Conscious pain and suffering of the Decedent prior to death;
• ☐ Medical expenses incurred prior to death;
• ☐ Lost wages and lost earning capacity from injury to death;
• ☐ Funeral and burial expenses (if pleaded under survival theory).

13. COUNT SIX — PUNITIVE DAMAGES

13.1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 12 as if fully set forth herein.

13.2. Statutory standard (§ 15-32-510 et seq.). Defendants' conduct was willful, wanton, or reckless, and was committed with conscious disregard for the rights and safety of others, including Plaintiff. Such conduct, established by clear and convincing evidence, supports an award of punitive damages.

13.3. Specific facts (illustrative — adapt to the case):

13.3.1. [Defendant ignored explicit warnings or known risks — e.g., "Defendant continued to operate despite a documented blood-alcohol level above the legal limit at the time of the procedure"];
13.3.2. [Defendant's pattern of similar conduct — e.g., "Defendant Institution had received four prior reports of similar staffing-related sentinel events in the prior 24 months and failed to implement corrective measures"];
13.3.3. [Other facts demonstrating reckless disregard.]

13.4. Plaintiff seeks punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact, subject to the cap and bifurcation provisions of S.C. Code Ann. §§ 15-32-510 through 15-32-540.

14. DAMAGES

14.1. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' acts and omissions, Plaintiff has suffered the following damages:

14.1.1. Past medical and hospital expenses in an amount in excess of $[______________];
14.1.2. Future medical and hospital expenses, including a life-care plan, in an amount to be determined at trial;
14.1.3. Lost wages and lost earning capacity in an amount to be determined at trial;
14.1.4. Past and future physical pain and suffering;
14.1.5. Past and future mental anguish and emotional distress;
14.1.6. Past and future loss of enjoyment of life;
14.1.7. Permanent physical injury, disability, and disfigurement;
14.1.8. Loss of consortium (where pleaded by spouse);
14.1.9. Wrongful death and survival damages (where applicable);
14.1.10. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
14.1.11. Costs of this action.

15. CAP INAPPLICABILITY — PLEADED IN THE ALTERNATIVE

15.1. Cap inapplicability under § 15-32-220(F). Plaintiff specifically pleads that the noneconomic damages cap of S.C. Code Ann. § 15-32-220 does not apply to this action because Defendants' conduct was, in one or more of the following respects:

• ☐ Grossly negligent;
• ☐ Willful;
• ☐ Wanton;
• ☐ Reckless;
• ☐ Intentional;
• ☐ Performed while under the influence of alcohol or any illegal or illicit use of drugs.

15.2. The factual basis for each such allegation is set forth in the foregoing paragraphs and incorporated by reference.

15.3. Economic damages. Plaintiff additionally pleads that the cap of § 15-32-220 applies, by its terms, only to noneconomic damages and does not limit recovery of economic damages, including past and future medical expenses, lost wages, and lost earning capacity.

16. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally where permitted by S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15, and severally otherwise, as follows:

A. Compensatory damages, both economic and noneconomic, in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact;

B. Noneconomic damages exceeding the statutory cap under § 15-32-220, on the basis of cap inapplicability pleaded in Section 15;

C. Wrongful death and survival damages on behalf of the statutory beneficiaries and the Estate, where applicable;

D. Punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact under § 15-32-510 et seq.;

E. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;

F. Costs of this action;

G. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

17. JURY DEMAND

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE, pursuant to Rule 38, SCRCP, and Article I, Section 14, of the South Carolina Constitution.

18. VERIFICATION AND COUNSEL SIGNATURE

This [___] day of [MONTH], [YEAR].

Respectfully submitted,

[ATTORNEY NAME], SC Bar No. [______]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[PHONE] / [EMAIL]
Counsel for Plaintiff

[Pro hac vice counsel signature block, if applicable]

VERIFICATION (where applicable per SCRCP)

I, [PLAINTIFF NAME], having read the foregoing Complaint, verify under penalty of perjury that the factual allegations contained herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

___________________________________
[PLAINTIFF NAME]

Sworn to and subscribed before me this [___] day of [MONTH], [YEAR].

___________________________________
Notary Public, State of South Carolina
My Commission Expires: [__/__/____]

19. REQUIRED EXHIBITS

• Exhibit A: Updated Affidavit of Expert Witness (S.C. Code Ann. §§ 15-36-100, 15-79-125)
• Exhibit A-1: Curriculum Vitae of Expert Witness
• Exhibit B: Mediator's declaration of impasse / non-viability / termination
• Exhibit C: Letters of Administration (if wrongful death/survival)
• Exhibit D: Original Notice of Intent to File Suit (filed [__/__/____])
• Exhibit E: Proof of service of NOI on each Defendant
• Exhibit F: Records-reviewed schedule (incorporated by reference into expert affidavit)

20. SOUTH CAROLINA PRACTICE NOTES

20.1. Pre-suit compliance is jurisdictional. Confirm and document § 15-79-125 compliance in the complaint itself; courts have dismissed complaints where compliance was not affirmatively pleaded.

20.2. Venue tactics. Charleston (9th Circuit), Richland (5th Circuit), and Greenville (13th Circuit) are major medical-malpractice venues. Each has different jury demographics, scheduling order practices, and bench composition. Where venue is properly available in multiple counties, choose deliberately. Watch for defense motions to transfer under § 15-7-100 (transfer for convenience).

20.3. Damages cap (§ 15-32-220). The 2026 CPI-indexed cap is approximately $580,461 per claimant against a single provider/institution and approximately $1,741,383 in the aggregate (verify the current-year figure with the S.C. Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office before drafting demand or settlement positions). The cap does NOT apply to economic damages; it does NOT apply where defendant's conduct was grossly negligent, willful, wanton, reckless, intentional, or while under the influence (§ 15-32-220(F)). Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381 (2011), discusses the cap's framework.

20.4. Joint and several liability (§ 15-38-15). A defendant whose share of fault is < 50% is severally liable only. Apportionment becomes a central liability and damages issue in multi-defendant cases. Plead facts that support ≥ 50% allocation against deep-pocket defendants where the evidence supports it.

20.5. Modified comparative fault (51% bar). Plaintiff recovers only if plaintiff's fault is 50% or less. Be alert to defense theories alleging contributory fault (failure to follow up, missed appointments, noncompliance with discharge instructions) and address proactively in expert testimony and damages presentation.

20.6. Apology Statute (§ 19-1-190). Provider expressions of sympathy/benevolence in designated meetings are inadmissible. Do not plead them; instead, build the case from records, policies, and standards.

20.7. Punitive damages procedure. § 15-32-520 governs admissibility of punitive damages evidence; § 15-32-530 caps punitives generally at the greater of three times compensatory damages or $500,000, with statutory exceptions (e.g., felony-related, intoxication-related conduct can permit higher awards). Plead and present supporting facts at trial.

20.8. Peer-review privilege (§ 40-71-20). Hospital quality and credentialing files are largely protected. Develop institutional negligence facts through publicly available licensure records, prior litigation, NPDB references where permissible, and discovery of policies/procedures and incident reports.

20.9. Expert qualifications. Brouwer (2014) and Ranucci (2014) clarify that exact specialty match is not required if the expert is qualified by substantive experience. However, defense counsel will challenge; document the related-field rationale in the expert affidavit.

20.10. Statute of limitations / repose (§ 15-3-545). The 6-year repose is a hard ceiling generally not subject to discovery-rule extension. NOI tolls SOL but consult counsel on whether tolling extends repose for any specific claim category.

20.11. Wrongful death plaintiff capacity. Wrongful death must be brought by the personal representative; secure Letters of Administration in advance. Survival is also a personal-representative claim.

20.12. Tort Claims Act considerations. If a defendant is a public hospital or government provider, S.C. Code § 15-78-10 et seq. (S.C. Tort Claims Act) imposes separate notice, caps, and procedural requirements distinct from § 15-79-125. Verify defendant status before proceeding under this template.

21. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

21.1. Statutes (verify current text via scstatehouse.gov):

• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-79-110 — Definitions
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-79-125 — Pre-suit notice and mediation
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-36-100 — Expert affidavit
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-3-545 — SOL / 6-year repose
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-32-220 — Noneconomic damages cap (CPI-indexed)
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-32-510 to 15-32-540 — Punitive damages
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-38-15 — Modified joint and several liability
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-7-30 — Venue
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-51-10 et seq. — Wrongful death
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-5-90 — Survival action
• S.C. Code Ann. § 19-1-190 — Apology Statute
• S.C. Code Ann. § 40-71-20 — Peer-review privilege
• S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-10 et seq. — Tort Claims Act (governmental defendants)

21.2. Court rules:

• South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure (SCRCP), particularly Rules 4, 7-12, 26-37, 38, 45.
• South Carolina Rules of Evidence (SCRE), particularly Rules 401-403, 702-704.
• South Carolina ADR Rules.

21.3. Inflation-adjusted cap data: S.C. Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office — Inflation Adjustments for Legal Proceedings: https://rfa.sc.gov/page/data-research/inflation-adjustments-legal-proceedings

21.4. Selected case authority (verify and Shepardize):

• Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 709 S.E.2d 650 (2011) — noneconomic cap framework discussion.
• Brouwer v. Sisters of Charity Providence Hosps., 409 S.C. 514, 763 S.E.2d 200 (2014) — related-field expert sufficiency.
• Ranucci v. Crain, 409 S.C. 493, 763 S.E.2d 189 (2014) — § 15-36-100 affidavit standards.
• Grier v. AMISUB of S.C., Inc., 397 S.C. 532, 725 S.E.2d 693 (2012) — affidavit specificity.
• State v. Council, 335 S.C. 1, 515 S.E.2d 508 (1999) — expert testimony admissibility framework (apply to medical expert opinions).

21.5. Disclaimer. This template is for informational and drafting-aid purposes only. It is not legal advice. South Carolina medical malpractice practice involves jurisdictional pre-suit prerequisites whose noncompliance may bar the claim. Engage SC-licensed counsel and verify all citations against current scstatehouse.gov text and current case law before filing.