Legal Opinion

Helsel v. City of North Myrtle Beach

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 13, 1992No. 23557PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Harwell, Justice:

The question presented is whether the trial judge erred in holding he was bound by findings contained in an order granting a temporary injunction. We hold he did err, and, accordingly, reverse and remand for trial.

I. FACTS

Respondents Charles F. Helsel, Judine B. Helsel, and Helsel Realty Company, Inc. (the Helsels) own beachfront property in North Myrtle Beach. Their property was protected by a vertical seawall erected on the beach approximately fifteen feet beyond their property line. After the seawall was destroyed in September 1989 by Hurricane Hugo, the Helsels received…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Alston v. LimehouseSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1901
  2. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Custom Recording Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1972
  3. Powell v. Immanuel Baptist ChurchSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1973

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. County of Richland v. SimpkinsCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2002
  2. Allegro, Inc. v. ScullyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2012
  3. MailSource, LLC v. M.A. Bailey & Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2003
  4. Allegro, Inc. v. ScullyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2014
  5. Peek v. Spartanburg Regional Healthcare SystemCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2005

5 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