Legal Opinion
Alston v. City of Camden
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided May 20, 1996No. 24431PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Toal, Justice:
This case concerns the Contract Clauses of the Constitutions of both the United States and South Carolina. The circuit court found that there was no impairment of any contractual right the petitioners may have possessed. We affirm.
FACTUAL/PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs (“Employees”) are employees of defendant City of Camden (“City”). Before April 1993, City provided Employees fringe benefits pursuant to the terms of city ordinances and of an employee handbook. The employee handbook did not contain any disclaimer providing that the handbook was not intended to create a…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United States Trust Co. of NY v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Allied Structural Steel Co. v. SpannausSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Dodge v. Board of Ed. of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. City of OrangeburgSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1999
- Ahrens v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011
- Layman v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
- Bishop v. City of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2013
- Armstrong v. SCHOOL DIST. FIVE, LEXINGTON, RICHLANDDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.