Mack v. Edens

Decision Date12 September 1995
Docket NumberNo. 2418,2418
Citation464 S.E.2d 124,320 S.C. 236
CourtSouth Carolina Court of Appeals
PartiesBasil P. MACK, Appellant, v. Robert M. EDENS, Hazel Platt and Douglas Platt, Defendants, of whom Robert M. Edens is Respondent. . Heard

S. Jahue Moore, of Kirkland, Wilson, Moore, Allen, Deneen & Taylor, West Columbia, for appellant.

Douglas N. Truslow, Columbia, for respondent.

CONNOR, Judge:

Basil P. Mack brought this declaratory judgment action against Robert M. Edens alleging Edens had wrongfully constructed a barrier across the dirt road leading to his house to keep Mack from using it. He contended the road had been impliedly dedicated to the public. 1 Edens answered and counterclaimed, requesting an injunction preventing Mack from using the roadway and seeking damages for trespass. The trial court held the roadway had not been dedicated to the public, enjoined Mack from entering Edens' land without permission, and awarded Edens $1,000 compensatory and $3,000 punitive damages. Mack appeals. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

The dispute in this case involves a one-lane unpaved road near Gaston in Lexington County. This dirt road begins at South Carolina Highway 65 and proceeds in a southerly direction across the property of Hazel and Douglas Platt, then across the property of Edens, and onto property owned by Mack. The Platt, Edens, and Mack properties consist largely of undeveloped woodland. Only Mack actually lives in a home on the property.

Mack bought his tract of land in 1978 from the estate of Newlin Mack, a distant relative. Edens acquired his property from his father's estate in 1982. The dirt road at issue, which is more than fifty years old, existed before either Mack or Edens acquired their land. Mack has always used the road to get to and from his property.

Mack and Edens first began quarreling in 1988, when Mack brought an action to enjoin Edens from letting water from his pond flow onto Mack's land. In that case the trial judge denied injunctive relief on the ground of laches. This court reversed and remanded for entry of an order of injunction barring Edens from allowing water to flow onto Mack's property. Mack v. Edens, 306 S.C. 433, 412 S.E.2d 431 (Ct.App.1991). After that lawsuit, Edens told Mack he could no longer use his half of the dirt road. When Mack continued to use the road, Edens posted "No Trespassing" signs and wrote Mack a letter requesting that he stay off his property. Mack continued to use the road. Eventually, Edens erected a berm across the road. Mack removed the berm, continued using the road, and eventually brought the instant action against Edens.

At trial, several witnesses testified the dirt road has historically been used by the public for various purposes, including: to deliver mail; to travel to a saw mill and a flour mill; to swim, fish, and attend baptismal services and school parties at a pond near Mack's; to erect and maintain public utilities; and, to have emergency access to Mack's property. The court determined the public's use of the roadway was basically recreational and religious, and concluded Mack had failed to establish an implied public dedication.

On appeal, Mack first argues the trial court erred in failing to find an implied dedication of the road. The determination of whether a roadway has been dedicated to the public is an action in equity. Tyler v. Guerry, 251 S.C. 120, 160 S.E.2d 889 (1968). As such, we have jurisdiction on appeal to find facts in accordance with our own view of the preponderance of the evidence. Townes Assoc., Ltd. v. City of Greenville, 266 S.C. 81, 221 S.E.2d 773 (1976).

Dedication requires two elements. First, the owner must express in a positive and unmistakable manner the intention to dedicate his property to public use. Horry County v. Laychur, 315 S.C. 364, 434 S.E.2d 259 (1993). Second, there must be, within a reasonable time, an express or implied public acceptance of the property offered for dedication. Helsel v. City of North Myrtle Beach, 307 S.C. 24, 413 S.E.2d 821 (1992).

Even though a landowner must positively and unmistakably express his or her intention to dedicate property, the intent to dedicate may be implied from allowing lengthy public use of the land. Cleland v. Westvaco Corp., 314 S.C. 508, 431 S.E.2d 264 (Ct.App.1993), cert. denied, (Feb. 3, 1994). Nevertheless, dedication is an exceptional mode of passing an interest in land, and proof of dedication must be strict, cogent, and convincing. The acts proved must not be consistent with any construction other than that of a dedication, and dedication may not be implied from the permissive, sporadic, and recreational use of property. The record must contain evidence the owner of the property clearly, convincingly, or unequivocally intended to dedicate the property for public use. Id.

As with intention to dedicate, no formal acceptance by a public authority is necessary to show public acceptance. Acceptance may be implied by the public or a public authority...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • College of Charleston Foundation v. Ham
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • January 24, 2008
    ...that invasion.'" Hawkins v. City of Greenville, 358 S.C. 280, 297, 594 S.E.2d 557, 566 (S.C.Ct.App.2004) (quoting Mack v. Edens, 320 S.C. 236, 240, 464 S.E.2d 124, 127 (1995)). The facts as alleged are that Defendant took an affirmative act to intentionally invade Dixie Plantation in order ......
  • Holtzclaw v. Morgan (In re Holtzclaw)
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of South Carolina
    • August 27, 2021
    ..." Winley v. Int'l Paper Co. , C/A No. 2:09-2030-CWH, 2013 WL 12377131, at *7 (D.S.C. May 10, 2013) (quoting Mack v. Edens , 320 S.C. 236, 464 S.E.2d 124, 127 (S.C. Ct. App. 1995) ). "The gist of trespass is the injury to possession, and generally either actual or constructive possession is ......
  • Cedar Cove Homeowners Ass'n v. DiPietro
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • March 13, 2006
    ...of that invasion." Snow v. City of Columbia, 305 S.C. 544, 553, 409 S.E.2d 797, 802 (Ct.App.1991); accord Mack v. Edens, 320 S.C. 236, 240, 464 S.E.2d 124, 127 (Ct.App.1995). The gist of trespass is the injury to possession, and generally either actual or constructive possession is sufficie......
  • Meyer v. McGowan, C/A No. 2:16-cv-00777-RMG-MGB
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • August 16, 2018
    ...of that invasion.'" Hawkins v. City of Greenville, 358 S.C. 280, 296, 594 S.E.2d 557, 566 (Ct. App. 2004) (quoting Mack v. Edens, 320 S.C. 236, 240, 464 S.E.2d 124, 127 (1995)). Under South Carolina law, a trespass is limited to the protection of property interests; i.e., any interference w......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 books & journal articles
  • B. Interference with Property
    • United States
    • The South Carolina Law of Torts (SCBar) Chapter 6 Intentional Torts
    • Invalid date
    ...Coll. of Charleston Found. v. Ham, 585 F. Supp. 2d 737 (D.S.C. 2008); see 22 Am. Jur. Damages §§ 13, 21 (2003) .[292] Mack v. Edens, 320 S.C. 236, 464 S.E.2d 124 (Ct. App. 1995); Stroud v. Elliott, 316 S.C. 242, 449 S.E.2d 261 (Ct. App. 1994); see infra Chapter 8, note 13 and accompanying t......
  • 44 Trespass
    • United States
    • Elements of Civil Causes of Action (SCBar) (2015 Ed.)
    • Invalid date
    ...544 S.E.2d 637 (Ct. App. 2001).[26] Snow v. City of Columbia, 305 S.C. 544, 409 S.E.2d 797, 802 (Ct. App. 1991). However in Mack v. Edens, 320 S.C. 236, 464 S.E.2d 124 (Ct. App. 1995) the court affirmed the decision that a trespass had occurred but reversed the award of both actual and puni......
  • A. Damages Generally
    • United States
    • The South Carolina Law of Torts (SCBar) Chapter 8 Damages
    • Invalid date
    ...Sanders v. Prince, 304 S.C. 236, 403 S.E.2d 640 (1991); Reid v. Harbison Dev. Corp., 289 S.C. 319, 345 S.E.2d 492 (1986); Mack v. Edens, 320 S.C. 236, 464 S.E.2d 124 (Ct. App. 1995); Stroud v. Elliott, 316 S.C. 242, 449 S.E.2d 261 (Ct. App. 1994); cert. denied (Mar. 23, 1995); Sparrow v. To......
  • E. Remedies
    • United States
    • Elements of Civil Causes of Action (SCBar) 46 Trespass
    • Invalid date
    ...544 S.E.2d 637 (Ct. App. 2001).[29] Snow v. City of Columbia, 305 S.C. 544, 409 S.E.2d 797, 802 (Ct. App. 1991). However in Mack v. Edens, 320 S.C. 236, 464 S.E.2d 124 (Ct. App. 1995) the court affirmed the decision that a trespass had occurred but reversed the award of both actual and puni......
  • 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