under Rule 36, both the initial answer and the amended answer may be published to the jury. The jury may consider the initial answers as evidence, while the party who made such answers ‘is free to explain why it was made and [amended].’ ”). Here, Contractor did not request to publish Commerce C can introduce [the requests to admit] as an exhibit or you can tell the jury that it’s like a fact.” Contractor, however, did not expand on this statement. The record does not contain the full charge to the jury nor does it show that the trial judge refused to present any requested charges to the jury. In fact, there is no indication in the record that the jury was charged with an incorrect expression of the law. See State v. Buckner, 341 S.C. 241, 534 S.E.2d 15 (Ct.App. 2000), cert. denied (<HOLDING>). Since the record does not contain any
recognizing south carolina as the governing law and finding no south carolina cases directly on point the court referred to applicable law from other jurisdictions holding that whether a jury charge comments on weight of evidence is determined by looking at the jury charge as a whole not isolated statements holding a jury charge which is substantially correct and covers the law does not require reversal recognizing south carolina as a jurisdiction where service on statutory agent is exclusive holding jury charge is proper if as a whole it is free from error and reflects the current and correct law of south carolina