Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Marathon Finance Co. v. HHC Liquidation Corp.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided January 27, 1997No. 2625Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

CURETON, Judge:

(Concurring in part and dissenting in part):

I concur with much of the majority opinion, but I respectfully disagree that all of the 1985 deed restrictions have been extinguished. I write separately as most of my reasoning and analysis is different from the majority.

*600I. 1983 RESTRICTIONS AND IMPLIED RECIPROCAL NEGATIVE EASEMENTS

Westin argues that it is entitled to enforce the “1983 Restrictions,” which were expressly placed on the Barony Tract in a document entitled “Declarations, Conditions, and Restrictions.” This document was executed by the Hilton Head Company (HHC), and…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Turman v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Rosen v. WolffSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
  3. Gordon E. Gouveia, Trustee in Bankruptcy for Kathleen Sue Hiles v. Barbara TazbirCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
  4. WBQ Partnership v. Commonwealth Department of Medical Assistance Services (In Re WBQ Partnership)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · 1995
  5. Evans v. PollockTexas Supreme Court · 1990

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API