Hampton v. Richland County Council

370 S.E.2d 714, 296 S.C. 72, 1988 S.C. LEXIS 91
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedJuly 11, 1988
Docket22887
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 370 S.E.2d 714 (Hampton v. Richland County Council) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hampton v. Richland County Council, 370 S.E.2d 714, 296 S.C. 72, 1988 S.C. LEXIS 91 (S.C. 1988).

Opinions

J. B. Ness, Acting Associate Justice:

We issued a writ of certiorari to review the opinion of the Court of Appeals reported at 292 S. C. 500, 357 S. E. (2d) 463 (Ct. App. 1987). After the careful consideration of the briefs and arguments, we have decided the writ was improvidently granted. We note, however, that the discussion of the so-called Fasano1 doctrine in the Court of Appeals’ opinion is clearly unnecessary to a resolution of the issue before the court and is therefore dicta. See Johnson v. Atlantic Coast Line R.Co., 142 S. C. 125, 140 S. E. 443 (1927).

Accordingly, the writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.

Writ dismissed.

Gregory, C. J., and Finney, and Chandler, JJ., concur. Harwell, J., concurring in separate opinion.

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

Related

State v. Addison
525 S.E.2d 901 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1999)
Knowles v. City of Aiken
407 S.E.2d 639 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
370 S.E.2d 714, 296 S.C. 72, 1988 S.C. LEXIS 91, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hampton-v-richland-county-council-sc-1988.