Brooks v. Council of Co-Owners of Stones Throw Horizontal Property Regime I
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Harwell, Chief Justice:
Russell E. Brooks (Buyer) argues that the trial judge erred in holding that as the purchaser of real estate pursuant to an executory contract, he may not maintain an action for nuisance. We agree and reverse.
I. Facts
In 1982, Buyer contracted to purchase a condominium on Hilton Head Island from his brother and sister-in-law, Robert N. Brooks and Charlotte E. Brooks (Sellers). Pursuant to the contract, Buyer gave Sellers a down payment and a note for the balance of the purchase price. Simultaneously, Sellers executed a deed and placed it in escrow to be delivered to Buyer…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cafe Associates, Ltd. v. GerngrossSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
- Albert Mendel & Son, Inc. v. KroghConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
- Klassen v. Central Kansas Cooperative Creamery Ass'nSupreme Court of Kansas · 1946
- Cook v. Rockwell International Corp.District Court, D. Colorado · 1991
- Conestee Mills v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1931
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- McEneaney v. Chestnut Hill Realty Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1995
- Lewis v. Premium Investment Corp.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
- Noor v. Centreville BankCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010
- Ingram v. Kasey's AssociatesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1997
- In Re KingsmoreUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · 2002