similar conduct resulting in harm sufficed to put defendant on notice under Degenhart)', Charleston, S.C. Registry for Golf and Tourism, Inc. v. Young Clement Rivers and Tisdale, LLP, 359 S.C. 635, 598 S.E.2d 717, 723 (S.C.App.2004) (finding supervisory liability inappropriate where the record contained no evidence that the defendant knew, or should have known, of its employee’s conduct causing the alleged harm); Brockington v. Pee Dee Mental Health Center, 315 S.C. 214, 433 S.E.2d 16 (S.C.App.1993) (concluding that no evidence existed to support the contention that the Center knew or should have known of the necessity to exercise control over the employee prior to the time he assaulted the patient); Doe by Doe v. Greenville Hospital System, 323 S.C. 33, 448 S.E.2d 564 (S.C.App.1994) (<HOLDING>). Hoskins invitation to the court to subscribe
holding that a cause of action accrues when the claimant knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong holding that the hospital knew or should have known of the necessity to control based on a similar prior instance of inappropriate sexual conduct with a minor holding that the statute of limitations begins to run under federal law when plaintiffs knew or should have known of the injury which forms the basis of their claims holding that disputed factual issue existed as to whether claimant knew or by exercise of reasonable diligence should have known prior to running of statute of limitations existence of compensable claim holding that a request is sufficiently clear if the administrator knew or should have known that plan information was requested