Legal Opinion
Hardin v. South Carolina Department of Transportation
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided February 12, 2007No. 26262PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Chief Justice TOAL:
These cases deal with the issue of whether and to what degree realignments and closures of public roads constitute “takings” within the meaning of Article I, § 13 of the South Carolina Constitution and the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Lower courts separately determined that the property owners in both Hardin and Tallent suffered takings as a result of actions of the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT). We reverse.
Factual/Procedural Background
In light of our disposition of these two appeals, we engage in only a brief review of the facts.
A…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Georgia v. RandolphSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Holliday Amusement Co. v. South CarolinaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
- South Carolina Department of Transportation v. M & T Enterprises of Mt. Pleasant, LLC.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2008
- Carolina Chloride, Inc. v. South Carolina Department of TransportationSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011
- City of North Myrtle Beach v. East Cherry Grove Realty Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2012
- Hilton Head Automotive, LLC v. South Carolina Department of TransportationSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2011
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.