Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Eldridge v. City of Greenwood

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided December 11, 1989No. 1428Published

1ConcurrenceGoolsby, Judge

I concur fully in Judge Cureton’s opinion. I think it appropriate, however, to comment briefly on Part I of Judge Gardner’s dissent.

In Part I of his dissent, Judge Gardner indicates he would uphold the trial court’s grant of summary judgment using the doctrine of “condemnation by substitution.” Under this theory, a municipality may constitutionally condemn specific property and exchange it for other property acquired for public purposes. See Annot., 20 A.L.R. (3d) 862 (1968).

The issue here is not whether the City of Greenwood had the right to condemn property for the relocation of the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Matthews v. Seaboard Air Line RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1903
  2. Smith v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1956
  3. Southern Ry. v. BeaudrotSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1902
  4. State Highway Com. v. ElizabethNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1928
  5. Ragsdale v. Southern Ry.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1901

7 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