Hampton v. Richland County
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Goolsby, Judge:
*502This is an action in mandamus brought by the appellants A. G. Hampton and Krystal Company against the respondents Richland County, Richland County Council, and members of the Richland County Council to compel the rezoning of certain property, which is owned by Hampton and subject to a contract of sale to Krystal, as a C-3 General Commercial District. County Council rezoned the property as a C-l Office and Institutional District. The Circuit Court refused to require County Council to rezone the property as C-3. The dispositive issue is whether County Council’s action in rezoning…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Fasano v. Board of County Com'rs of Washington Cty.Oregon Supreme Court · 1973
- Ed Zaagman, Inc. v. City of KentwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1979
- Rush v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1965
- James v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1955
- Bob Jones University, Inc. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1963
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Ravan v. Greenville CountyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993
- Harbit v. City of CharlestonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2009
- Knowles v. City of AikenSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
- Moore v. Sumter County CouncilSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1990
- Bear Enterprises v. County of GreenvilleCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1995
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.