Legal Opinion

Swindler v. Swindler

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided July 7, 2003No. 3658PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOWARD, J.:

In this foreclosure action, we are asked to determine whether a promissory note secured by a real estate mortgage is a negotiable instrument governed by Article 3 of the South Carolina Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”). James R. Swindler, Marshalene S. Frady, and Rebecca Spears (collectively, “the Swindler Family”) brought this action against their sister-in-law, Nancy Swindler (“Nancy”), to foreclose a mortgage encumbering a 54.5-acre tract of land Nancy purchased from their mother, Margaret Swindler (“Margaret”). Nancy asserted various defenses, including that Margaret had…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
  2. I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mt. PleasantSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
  3. Brown v. South Carolina Department of Health & Environmental ControlSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  4. Rowe v. HyattSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
  5. Hawkins v. Bruno Yacht Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2003

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bergstrom v. Palmetto Health AllianceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2004
  2. Deep Keel, LLC v. Atlantic Private Equity Group, LLCCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2015
  3. In Re NealsUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · 2011
  4. Bostic v. American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API