Lominick v. City of Aiken
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Bussey, Justice.
This action for relief by way of declaratory judgment arose out of the following facts. The plaintiff-appellant, a young registered pharmacist residing and employed in Aiken, in the year 1962 conceived the idea of buying a lot in that city, located at the intersection of Richland Avenue and Waterloo Street, for the purpose of erecting thereon a drug store. Richland Avenue, which passes in front of the property, is one of the most heavily traveled roads in the state as both U. S. Highway No. 1 and Highway No. 78 empty their traffic into it.
The lot is in what is known as a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pullman Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1959
- Stanley Ex Rel. Stanley v. GarySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1960
- Central Realty Corp. v. AllisonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1951
- DePass v. CITY OF SPARTANBURGSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1959
- Isgett v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Meredith v. ElliottSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1966
- Caserta v. Zoning Board of AppealsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- Ex Parte Allstate Ins. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1966
- Townsend v. City of DillonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1997
- Charleston Television, Inc. v. South Carolina Budget & Control BoardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1988
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.