From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dockside Assoc. v. Detyens, Simmons Carlisle

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Dec 16, 1985
337 S.E.2d 887 (S.C. 1985)

Opinion

22426

Submitted December 3, 1985.

Decided December 16, 1985.

James L. Bell, of Bell Perry, Columbia, for petitioners. Morris D. Rosen, of Rosen, Oberman Rosen, and William H. Grimball, of Grimball, Cabaniss, Vaughan Robinson, Charleston, for respondents.


Submitted Dec. 3, 1985.

Decided Dec. 16, 1985.


We grant certiorari to review the judgment of the Court of Appeals, reported at 285 S.C. 567, 330 S.E.2d 537 (Ct. App. 1985), on the issue of Dockside Association's (Association) standing. We dispense with the filing of transcripts and briefs.

The Court of Appeals found that the condominium's common elements were owned by the apartment owners rather than the Association. Based on this, the court held that Association was not the real party in interest and thus had no standing to sue. However, this Court has held that a property regime has standing to bring an action for construction defects in common elements that the regime has a duty to maintain. Queens Grant Villas Horizontal Property Regimes v. Daniel International Corp., 335 S.E.2d 365 (S.C. 1985); Roundtree Villas Association v. 4701 Kings Corp., 282 S.C. 415, 321 S.E.2d 46 (1984). We reverse the Court of Appeals and hold that Association had standing to maintain this action.

Since we deny certiorari on the remaining issues, our decision on this issue does not affect the result in this case. The decision of the Court of Appeals is therefore

Affirmed as modified.


Summaries of

Dockside Assoc. v. Detyens, Simmons Carlisle

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Dec 16, 1985
337 S.E.2d 887 (S.C. 1985)
Case details for

Dockside Assoc. v. Detyens, Simmons Carlisle

Case Details

Full title:DOCKSIDE ASSOCIATION, INC., Robert L. Modder and Jo Ann Morros, on behalf…

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Dec 16, 1985

Citations

337 S.E.2d 887 (S.C. 1985)
337 S.E.2d 887

Citing Cases

Terre Du Lac Ass'n v. Terre Du Lac, Inc.

iation from suing on behalf of its members collectively. Other jurisdictions have recognized that an owners…

McGann v. Mungo

Their demurrers assert the amended complaint improperly unites several causes of action because the causes of…