Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Ex Parte Moore

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided June 4, 2001No. 3352Published

1ConcurrenceShuler, Judge

Although I concur in the ultimate judgment of the Court, I write separately to express my concern over the wisdom of adopting a bright-line rule of 5:00 p.m. on the day of the foreclosure sale for deposits to be made, in the absence of any specific provisions in the order or notice of sale. In my view, this Court has neither the authority nor legal support to establish such a rule.

Initially, because the requirements for a judicial sale are governed primarily by statute and Rule 71, SCRCP, and no provision sets forth a precise time for the payment of bid deposits, I believe the establishment…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Henderson v. EvansSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1977
  2. Ex Parte KellerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1937
  3. Ex Parte FloydSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1928
  4. Yates v. GridleySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1882
  5. Harrington v. BlackstonCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993

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

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

Powered by the Exa API