Legal Opinion
Byrd v. City of Hartsville
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided September 19, 2005No. 26040PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Justice PLEICONES:
This is an inverse-condemnation case. Appellant Phelix Byrd (Byrd) appeals from the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment for Respondent City of Hartsville (the City). We certified the case pursuant to Rule 204(b), SCACR. We affirm.
FACTS
Byrd owned land that lay partly in the City (the City Tract) and partly in Darlington County. The property was part of what used to be Coker Farms, a National Historic Landmark (NHL). 1 After Coker Farms was divided and sold piecemeal, the NHL designation remained over all of the parcels, including Byrd’s. As discussed below, the City’s…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Agins v. City of TiburonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Rose Acre Farms, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- Mack Phillips v. Montgomery County, TennesseeTennessee Supreme Court · 2014
- Herron v. CENTURY BMWSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011
- City of Hartsville v. South Carolina Municipal Insurance & Risk Financing FundSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2009
- Quail Hill, LLC v. County of RichlandSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2010
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.