Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Rhett v. Gray

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided December 19, 2012No. 5066Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPieper, J.

I respectfully dissent with the majority’s decision to hold the master erred in finding that one of the easements was abandoned. Based upon our standard of review, I would affirm the master’s determination of abandonment of the *500easement, as I would find evidence does exist in the record to support that determination. See Judy v. Kennedy, 398 S.C. 471, 478, 728 S.E.2d 484, 487 (Ct.App.2012) (providing the “termination of an easement by abandonment is a factual question in an action at law”); Eldridge v. Eldridge, 398 S.C. 113, 118, 728 S.E.2d 24, 26 (2012) (“In an action at law tried by a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Eldridge v. EldridgeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2012
  2. Judy v. KennedyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API