Legal Opinion · Dissent

PREFERRED SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, INC. v. Royal Garden Resort, Inc.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided February 20, 1990No. 23114Published

1DissentToal, Justice

I respectfully dissent. I would hold that Cianbro has validly perfected its lien and is entitled to foreclose. I would therefore reverse the Court of Appeals and affirm the Circuit Court.

Under the terms of its contract, Cianbro was entitled to progress payments as construction proceeded. When the project reached “substantial completion,” as contractually defined, Cianbro was entitled to the entire amount of. its fixed price. The residential condominium units were completed prior to the other parts of the project. The developer *6proceeded to sell completed residential units to innocent third…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Williamson v. Hotel MelroseSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1918
  2. Wood v. RH HARDY, JR.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1959
  3. Preferred Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Royal Garden Resort, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1988
  4. Willard v. FinchSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1922

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

Powered by the Exa API