Hamilton v. Martin, 20610

Decision Date15 February 1978
Docket NumberNo. 20610,20610
Citation241 S.E.2d 569,270 S.C. 223
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesPaul R. HAMILTON, Appellant, v. William M. MARTIN, Respondent.

Frank B. Register, Jr., Lexington, for appellant.

Robert E. Salane and Edmund H. Monteith, Columbia, for respondent.

LEWIS, Chief Justice:

The South Carolina Highway Department acquired, through condemnation, property of appellant, which was under lease to respondent. A joint check in payment was issued to appellant and respondent, and they were unable to effect a division of the proceeds from the condemnation because of a disagreement as to the value of respondent's leasehold interest in the property. This action was brought by the appellant-landowner to have that issue determined. The master, to whom the issue was referred found the value of respondent's leasehold interest to be the sum of $6,871.43. Upon exceptions by the respondent to the master's findings, the trial judge determined the value of respondent's interest to be $13,451.61 and entered judgment accordingly, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

The parties agree that this is an equity case in which the master and circuit judge are in disagreement over factual findings and that, under settled principles, this court may make findings in accordance with its own view of the preponderance of the evidence, Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of Greenville, 266 S.C. 81, 221 S.E.2d 773.

The issue on appeal involves the purely factual issue of the value of respondent's leasehold interest.

The property involved was leased by appellant to respondent in August 1970, under a written agreement, for a term of five (5) years at a monthly rental of forty ($40.00) dollars. An addendum to the agreement was entered into in September 1971 granting an option to respondent to extend the term of the lease an additional five (5) years at an increased monthly rental of one hundred ($100.00) dollars.

Respondent occupied the leased premises until April 3, 1975, when the Highway Department acquired the property through condemnation for the sum of $56,000.00. At the time of condemnation, there remained a period of four (4) months and six (6) days on the original lease and respondent's option to renew the lease for an additional five (5) year term. Both, the master and circuit judge, concluded that respondent was entitled to compensation for the remaining portion of the original lease, plus compensation for the full term (five (5) years) of his unexercised...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Dept. of Transp. v. M & T Ent.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 12 Septiembre 2008
    ...raised in an appellants brief was insufficient to preserve the argument for review."). Tenant asserted that Hamilton v. Martin, 270 S.C. 223, 225, 241 S.E.2d 569, 570 (1978) does not apply where a contract contains a condemnation clause and that Hamilton was a total taking case, but only ra......
  • Ingram v. Kasey's Associates
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 3 Junio 1997
    ...agree in writing as to whom just compensation must be made and paid." S.C.Code Ann. § 28-2-460 (Rev.1991). 8 Cf. Hamilton v. Martin, 270 S.C. 223, 241 S.E.2d 569 (1978). However, regardless of whether Ingram should or could have sought compensation at the condemnation stage, it would be inc......
  • Webber v. Webber
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 20 Marzo 1985
  • Gray v. South Carolina Dept. of Highways and Public Transp., 1874
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 19 Febrero 1992
    ...plus the value of the right to renew the lease, less the rent which the tenant would pay for such use and occupancy. Hamilton v. Martin, 270 S.C. 223, 241 S.E.2d 569 (1978). See Annotation, Eminent Domain: Measure and Elements of Lessee's Compensation for Condemnor's Taking or Damaging of L......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT