Friedberg v. Goudeau

309 S.E.2d 578, 279 S.C. 561, 1983 S.C. App. LEXIS 77
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided December 5, 1983·No. 22013·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The appellants brought this action for partition of a cotenancy in which they owned the surface rights and one-half of the mineral rights. The respondents owned the remaining half of the mineral rights. Respondents moved for summary j udgment, and summary j udgment was granted on the ground that appellants impliedly agreed not to seek, partition of the mineral rights.

The record does not reveal that this ground was properly before the trial court. We accordingly reverse the entry of summary judgment. We express no opinion regarding the merits of the partition action.

Reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Friedberg v. Goudeau, 309 S.E.2d 578, 279 S.C. 561, 1983 S.C. App. LEXIS 77 (S.C. 1983).

309 S.E.2d 578 (Friedberg v. Goudeau) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grazia v. South Carolina State Plastering, LLC
703 S.E.2d 197 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2010)
City of North Myrtle Beach v. Lewis-Davis
599 S.E.2d 462 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2004)
Griffin v. Capital Cash
423 S.E.2d 143 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1992)