Windham v. Honeycutt
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Ness, Justice:
This is an action for specific performance of a real estate contract brought by respondent buyer against appellant seller. The trial judge found the buyer entitled to specific performance. We affirm.
First, appellant asserts the trial court erred in hearing the matter in less than ninety days from the date of the initial pleadings in violation of Circuit Court Rule 26(7)(e). The record reveals appellant not only failed to object, but affirmatively agreed to the hearing date; she has thus waived and is estopped to pursue the issue. American Hardware Supply Co. v. Whitmire, S. C.,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Rosamond Enterprises, Inc. v. McGranahanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983
- American Hardware Supply Co., Inc. v. WhitmireSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1983
- Conran v. YagerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1975
- Lipscomb v. PooleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1966
3Cited by10 opinions
- Player v. ChandlerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1989
- SEA PINES PLANTATION COMPANY v. WellsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
- Windham v. HoneycuttCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1986
- Beaufort County v. ButlerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1994
- State v. McIntyreSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.