Legal Opinion

Hughes v. Nelson

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided November 26, 1990No. 1575PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Sanders, Chief Judge:

Respondent Lindberg Hughes brought this action, alleging appellant Anthony Nelson had blocked his access to the Edisto River by obstructing a certain canal. After a trial, the Circuit Court found “the canal constitutes navigable waters.” Based on this finding, the Court ordered Mr. Nelson to remove all obstructions previously placed in the canal and enjoined him from further obstructing the canal or “blocking access.” We affirm.

There is no dispute about the fact that Mr. Nelson obstructed the canal. Nor is there any doubt that the unautho rized obstruction of navigable…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Lyon v. Columbia Water Power Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1909
  2. Heyward v. Farmers' Mining Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1894
  3. State Ex Rel. Medlock v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1986
  4. Ahrens v. McDanielCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
  5. Walters v. Canal InsuranceCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1987

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Natland Corp. v. Baker's Port, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1993
  2. White's Mill Colony, Inc. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2005
  3. McQueen v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
  4. Newcomb v. County of CarteretCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
  5. FISH HOUSE, INC. v. ClarkeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API