Ingram v. Kasey's Associates
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
TOAL, Justice:
Kasey’s Associates (“Kasey’s”) and Roy Prescott (“Prescott”) appeal the Court of Appeals’ decision that Henry Ingram’s (“Ingram”) written notice of intent to exercise his option was sufficient to fulfill the terms of the option contract. The decision of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED for four main reasons: (1) the Court of Appeals used no equity doctrines, even though Ingram sought an equitable remedy; (2) the Court of Appeals did not strictly construe the option contract in favor of the optionor, and against the optionee; (3) the Court of Appeals disregarded specific findings…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of GreenvilleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1976
- C.A.N. Enterprises, Inc. v. South Carolina Health & Human Services Finance CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1988
- King v. OxfordCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1984
- Tiger, Inc. Ex Rel. Green Apple Partnership v. Fisher Agro, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1989
- First Union Nat. Bank of SC v. SodenCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1998
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Twin City Fire Insurance Company v. Ben Arnold-Sunbelt Beverage Company Of South Carolina, LpCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2005
- Zabinski v. Bright Acres AssociatesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
- Sloan v. Greenville CountyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2003
- Floyd v. FloydCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2005
- Jones v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2005
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.