Legal Opinion · Dissent

Winrose Homeowners' Ass'n, Inc. v. Hale

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided April 4, 2018No. Appellate Case No. 2015-001807; Opinion No. 5549Published

1DissentLockemy, C.J.

I respectfully dissent. I agree with the majority that the mortgage should be taken into account when determining whether a bid at a judicial sale is so grossly inadequate it shocks the conscience. I would utilize the Equity Method as a better vehicle to determine whether a bid shocks the conscience.

As the majority concedes, this court has previously approved the use of the Equity Method to determine the adequacy of a successful bid during a judicial sale. See Fed. Nat. Morg. Ass'n v. Brooks , 304 S.C. 506, 510, 405 S.E.2d 604, 606 (Ct. App. 1991). While the majority correctly indicates the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ex Parte Eastern Savings Bank, FSB v. SandersCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2007
  2. Bloody Point Property Owners Ass'n v. AshtonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2014
  3. Arrow Bonding Co. v. WarrenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2012
  4. Stoney v. StoneySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API