Legal Opinion
South Carolina Department of Transportation v. Revels
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided December 10, 2014No. Appellate Case 2012-213378; 27469PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Beatty
After prevailing in a condemnation action, landowners (“Petitioners”) moved for an award of attorneys’ fees pursuant to section 28 — 2—510(B)(1) of the Eminent Domain Procedure Act (the “Act”). 1 Contrary to Petitioners’ view, the circuit court determined attorneys’ fees should be awarded based on an hourly rate via a lodestar calculation 2 rather than the contin gency fee agreement between Petitioners and their attorney. The Court of Appeals affirmed. S.C. Dep’t of Transp. v. Revels, 399 S.C. 423, 731 S.E.2d 897 (Ct.App.2012). This Court granted Petitioners’ request for a writ of certiorari…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean AirSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. PleasantSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
- Jackson v. SpeedSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1997
- Blumberg v. Nealco, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Maybank v. BB&T Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2016
- Ziegler v. Dorchester CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2019
- TCC of Charleston, Inc. v. Concord and Cumberland, LLCCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2025
- TCC of Charleston, Inc. v. Concord and Cumberland, LLCCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2025