Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 South Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2005–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by South Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Jones v. Daleygreen2 sentences2023Co., 369 S.C. 410, 419 , 633 S.E.2d 136, 141 (2006) ("A prescriptive easement is not implied by law but is established by the conduct of the dominant tenement owner . . . ."); Horry County v. Laychur, 315 S.C. 364, 367 , 434 S.E.2d 259, 261 (1993) (stating that to establish a prescriptive easement, the party asserting the right must show: (1) continued and uninterrupted use of the right for twenty years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) use which is either adverse or under a claim of right); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316 , 609 S.E.2d 597, 600 (Ct. App. 2005) ("To establish an 2023Co., 369 S.C. 410, 419 , 633 S.E.2d 136, 141 (2006) ("A prescriptive easement is not implied by law but is established by the conduct of the dominant tenement owner . . . ."); Horry County v. Laychur, 315 S.C. 364, 367 , 434 S.E.2d 259, 261 (1993) (stating that to establish a prescriptive easement, the party asserting the right must show: (1) continued and uninterrupted use of the right for twenty years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) use which is either adverse or under a claim of right); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316 , 609 S.E.2d 597, 600 (Ct. App. 2005) ("To establish an | 4 | 4 |
Horry County v. Laychurgreen2 sentences2023Co., 369 S.C. 410, 419 , 633 S.E.2d 136, 141 (2006) ("A prescriptive easement is not implied by law but is established by the conduct of the dominant tenement owner . . . ."); Horry County v. Laychur, 315 S.C. 364, 367 , 434 S.E.2d 259, 261 (1993) (stating that to establish a prescriptive easement, the party asserting the right must show: (1) continued and uninterrupted use of the right for twenty years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) use which is either adverse or under a claim of right); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316 , 609 S.E.2d 597, 600 (Ct. App. 2005) ("To establish an 2023Co., 369 S.C. 410, 419 , 633 S.E.2d 136, 141 (2006) ("A prescriptive easement is not implied by law but is established by the conduct of the dominant tenement owner . . . ."); Horry County v. Laychur, 315 S.C. 364, 367 , 434 S.E.2d 259, 261 (1993) (stating that to establish a prescriptive easement, the party asserting the right must show: (1) continued and uninterrupted use of the right for twenty years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) use which is either adverse or under a claim of right); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316 , 609 S.E.2d 597, 600 (Ct. App. 2005) ("To establish an | 1 | 2 |
Morrow v. Dychesgreen2 sentences2023Coop., Inc., 419 S.C. 223, 229-32 , 797 S.E.2d 387, 390-92 (2016) ("[A]dverse use and claim of right cannot exist as separate methods of proving the third element of a prescriptive easement as the two terms are, in effect, one and the same."); id. at 317 , 609 S.E.2d at 600 (stating there is no requirement of exclusivity of use to establish a prescriptive easement); Morrow v. Dyches, 328 S.C. 522, 527 , 492 S.E.2d 420, 423 (Ct. App. 1997) (holding the party claiming a prescriptive easement bears the burden of proving all of the elements). 2023Coop., Inc., 419 S.C. 223, 229-32 , 797 S.E.2d 387, 390-92 (2016) ("[A]dverse use and claim of right cannot exist as separate methods of proving the third element of a prescriptive easement as the two terms are, in effect, one and the same."); id. at 317 , 609 S.E.2d at 600 (stating there is no requirement of exclusivity of use to establish a prescriptive easement); Morrow v. Dyches, 328 S.C. 522, 527 , 492 S.E.2d 420, 423 (Ct. App. 1997) (holding the party claiming a prescriptive easement bears the burden of proving all of the elements). | 1 | 1 |
Boyd v. BellSouth Telephone Telegraph Co.green2 sentences2023Co., 369 S.C. 410, 419 , 633 S.E.2d 136, 141 (2006) ("A prescriptive easement is not implied by law but is established by the conduct of the dominant tenement owner . . . ."); Horry County v. Laychur, 315 S.C. 364, 367 , 434 S.E.2d 259, 261 (1993) (stating that to establish a prescriptive easement, the party asserting the right must show: (1) continued and uninterrupted use of the right for twenty years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) use which is either adverse or under a claim of right); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316 , 609 S.E.2d 597, 600 (Ct. App. 2005) ("To establish an 2023Co., 369 S.C. 410, 419 , 633 S.E.2d 136, 141 (2006) ("A prescriptive easement is not implied by law but is established by the conduct of the dominant tenement owner . . . ."); Horry County v. Laychur, 315 S.C. 364, 367 , 434 S.E.2d 259, 261 (1993) (stating that to establish a prescriptive easement, the party asserting the right must show: (1) continued and uninterrupted use of the right for twenty years; (2) the identity of the thing enjoyed; and (3) use which is either adverse or under a claim of right); Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 316 , 609 S.E.2d 597, 600 (Ct. App. 2005) ("To establish an | 1 | 1 |
Simmons v. Berkeley Electric Cooperative, Inc.green2 sentences2023Coop., Inc., 419 S.C. 223, 229-32 , 797 S.E.2d 387, 390-92 (2016) ("[A]dverse use and claim of right cannot exist as separate methods of proving the third element of a prescriptive easement as the two terms are, in effect, one and the same."); id. at 317 , 609 S.E.2d at 600 (stating there is no requirement of exclusivity of use to establish a prescriptive easement); Morrow v. Dyches, 328 S.C. 522, 527 , 492 S.E.2d 420, 423 (Ct. App. 1997) (holding the party claiming a prescriptive easement bears the burden of proving all of the elements). 2023Coop., Inc., 419 S.C. 223, 229-32 , 797 S.E.2d 387, 390-92 (2016) ("[A]dverse use and claim of right cannot exist as separate methods of proving the third element of a prescriptive easement as the two terms are, in effect, one and the same."); id. at 317 , 609 S.E.2d at 600 (stating there is no requirement of exclusivity of use to establish a prescriptive easement); Morrow v. Dyches, 328 S.C. 522, 527 , 492 S.E.2d 420, 423 (Ct. App. 1997) (holding the party claiming a prescriptive easement bears the burden of proving all of the elements). | 1 | 1 |
Hartley v. John Wesley United Methodist Churchgreen2 sentences2016Therefore, if a claimant cannot prove the elements of adverse use, then, under the Court of Appeals’ approach, the claimant could establish a prescriptive easement under a claim of right. “[I]n order for a party to earn a prescriptive easement under claim of right he must demonstrate a substantial belief that he had the right to use the [property] based upon the totality of circumstances surrounding his use.” Hartley v. John Wesley United Methodist Church of Johns Island, 355 S.C. 145, 151 , 584 S.E.2d 386, 389 (Ct. App. 2003). 2016Therefore, if a claimant cannot prove the elements of adverse use, then, under the Court of Appeals’ approach, the claimant could establish a prescriptive easement under a claim of right. “[I]n order for a party to earn a prescriptive easement under claim of right he must demonstrate a substantial belief that he had the right to use the [property] based upon the totality of circumstances surrounding his use.” Hartley v. John Wesley United Methodist Church of Johns Island, 355 S.C. 145, 151 , 584 S.E.2d 386, 389 (Ct. App. 2003). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Revis v. Barrett
green
1 sentence2005Id. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.