Springob v. Farrar
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
1DissentAnderson, Judge
I respectfully dissent. I disagree with the analysis and reasoning of the majority. I would reverse.
The majority plucks isolated quotes from' South Carolina cases relating to easements to justify the erroneous result reached. The holding by the majority turns the law of easements on its head. Indubitably, the holding enunciated by the majority is fatally flawed when juxtaposed to existing easement law in South Carolina. The efficacy of the majority’s opinion is to place the law of easements in a continuum of confusion.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The determination of the existence of an easement is a…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
- Tupper v. Dorchester CountySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1997
- Carolina Land Company, Inc. v. BlandSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1975
- Thomson v. WadeNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Willard v. First Church of Christ, ScientistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.