Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Sheek v. Crimestoppers Alarm Systems
Citations: 377 S.E.2d 132; 297 S.C. 375; 1989 S.C. App. LEXIS 9Docket: 1288
Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina; February 6, 1989; South Carolina; State Appellate Court
Gene Sheek appealed against Crimestoppers Alarm Systems and Curtis M. Head, alleging negligence, breach of contract, fraud, and unfair trade practices following a burglary at his home where an alarm system was installed. The case was tried before a Master, who ruled in favor of the respondents. Sheek's key arguments included claims of negligence in the alarm system's installation, citing expert testimony that the exterior siren should not be placed outside, and if it was, it should be protected by a tamper-resistant box. He also contended that the alarm wiring should be in parallel, not series. The appellate court upheld the Master's findings, emphasizing that it could only overturn these if unsupported by evidence. Head's testimony countered Sheek’s claims, stating he had recommended a different siren location which Sheek rejected, and that the alarm was wired properly. Sheek challenged the credibility of Head’s testimony, arguing it contradicted earlier depositions, but the court noted that credibility assessments are the purview of the trial judge. Additionally, Sheek's argument regarding breach of implied warranties was not considered, as it was not raised in the lower court. The appellate court affirmed the Master’s findings and dismissed other issues as lacking merit.