Legal Opinion

Bunkum v. Manor Properties

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided January 22, 1996No. 2449PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant, Marie Bunkum, commenced this action pursuant to Rule 60(b), SCRCP, seeking to have a “Supplemental Order of Judgment of [sic] Costs” entered on October 7, 1993 by the Charleston County Master-in-Equity declared void because it was not statutorily authorized. She simultaneously moved pursuant to Rule 65(b), SCRCP, for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction to enjoin the impending sale of her residence. The trial judge entered a TRO preventing the sale of Bunkum’s property, but after conducting a hearing one week later, issued an order dissolving the TRO,…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
  2. Muller v. Myrtle Beach Golf & Yacht ClubSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1993
  3. Smith Companies of Greenville, Inc. v. HayesCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993
  4. State v. GorieSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1971
  5. DeWitt v. South Carolina Department of Highways & Public TransportationSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1980

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Eldridge v. City of GreenwoodCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1998
  2. South Carolina Department of Transportation v. M & T Enterprises of Mt. Pleasant, LLC.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2008
  3. Lake v. Reeder Construction Co.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1998
  4. Van Ness v. Eckerd Corp.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2002
  5. Deep Keel, LLC v. Atlantic Private Equity Group, LLCCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2015

9 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