Legal Opinion
Seabrook v. Knox
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided June 19, 2006No. 26169PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Toal
The trial court held that the City of Folly Beach (City) denied the due process and equal protection rights of Edward M. Seabrook and Folly North Partners (collectively Respondents) as guaranteed by the United States Constitution. This case was certified from the court of appeals pursuant to Rule 204(b), SCACR. We reverse.
Factual/Procedural Background
This suit is based on the conduct of the City of Folly Beach, the Folly Beach City Council (City Council), and Folly Beach’s local zoning authorities concerning a parcel of property owned by Seabrook. In 1996, Seabrook sold Folly North Partners…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Powell v. McCormackSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
- Mathis v. South Carolina State Highway DepartmentSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1973
- Worsley Companies v. Town of Mount PleasantSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Collins Holding Corp. v. Wausau Underwriters InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2008
- Rolen v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2009
- Richland County v. Carolina Chloride, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2009
- SOUTHEASTERN HOUSING FOUNDATION v. SmithCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2008
- Christ Central Ministries v. City of Columbia Bd. of Zoning AppealsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2018
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.