Legal Opinion

Miller v. City of Camden

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided December 23, 1997No. 24732PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, Justice:

Respondents commenced these wrongful death and personal injury actions against petitioner Kendall Company (Kendall) and City of Camden (City) to recover for damages allegedly sustained when the Kendall Lake dam broke. The trial judge granted Kendall summary judgment on the ground Kendall owed respondents no duty of care. The Court of Appeals reversed, finding Kendall owed a duty of care as a matter of law by virtue of its control of the dam and its voluntary *313undertaking to monitor the lake for the safety of others. Miller v. City of Camden, 317 S.C. 28, 451 S.E.2d 401 (1994).…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Koester v. Carolina Rental Center, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
  2. Jefferson County School District R-1 v. Justus ex rel. JustusSupreme Court of Colorado · 1986
  3. Mozingo v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
  4. Russell v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  5. R.A. Peck, Inc. v. Liberty Federal Savings BankNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1988

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Hendricks v. Clemson UniversitySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
  2. Wright v. PRG Real Estate Mgmt., Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2019
  3. Moore v. WeinbergCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2007
  4. Vaughan v. Town of LymanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
  5. Johnson v. Robert E. Lee Academy, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2012

24 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