Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Vick v. South Carolina Department of Transportation
Date: 10-15-2001
Case Number: 3393
Judge: Hearn
Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
Plaintiff's Attorney: Joseph S. Brockington of Charleston, for respondent.
Defendant's Attorney: Christopher L. Murphy, of Stuckey Law Offices, of
Charleston; and Assistant Chief Counsel Glennith C.
Johnson, of Columbia, for appellant.
condemnation action against the South Carolina Department of Transportation
(SCDOT), alleging damage to a private road. The matter was referred to the master-in-equity to address the issue of ownership of the property, reserving the
issue of damages if the road was found to be private for a jury trial. After the
master found Vick owned the road, a jury awarded him $134,261.52, and the
circuit court awarded attorney fees and costs.
* * *
Pumpkin Lane is a 15-foot-wide, dead-end road near the Town of
Mount Pleasant. It is approximately 980 feet long and runs in a straight line
beside five residential lots. The road and surrounding property were originally
part of a tract conveyed to Vermell Ola Wiggins. In 1954, she subdivided the
property into five lots. On a plat prepared at that time (Wiggins Plat), Pumpkin
Lane was named “Vermell Ole [sic] Wiggins Drive.”
Around 1980, Vick made a verbal agreement with Benjamin
Wiggins, Vermell’s husband, to purchase all of the lots on Pumpkin Lane over
time. By 1988, Vick owned three of the five lots. He purchased the fourth lot
in 1989 and the fifth in 1997. In 1996, Vick received and recorded a quitclaim
deed to Pumpkin Lane from Benjamin Wiggins as Vermell’s heir.
In the late 1980s, SCDOT made plans for construction of the Mark
Clark Expressway, including placing two concrete pipes under Pumpkin Lane
to remove water that was expected to drain along the expressway. Installation
of the pipes began in 1990.1 When the project was completed, the contractors
realized they had mistakenly placed the pipes partially under Vick’s lots, instead
of under Pumpkin Lane as detailed in the plans. As a result, SCDOT
condemned a five-foot-wide strip of land on each of the lots for which Vick was
paid $15,000.
In addition to the improper pipe placement, Vick noticed a
deterioration in the condition of Pumpkin Lane. Before the construction, the
road had a gravel surface. SCDOT resurfaced the road with dirt. Portions of the
road caved in and deep potholes developed due to problems with the underground pipes. Vick purchased a dump truck and brought in fill material
to repair the road after he unsuccessfully tried to persuade SCDOT to do so.
* * *
Click the case caption above for the full text of the
Court's opinion.
About This Case
What was the outcome of Vick v. South Carolina Department of Transportation?
The outcome was: Affirmed.
Which court heard Vick v. South Carolina Department of Transportation?
This case was heard in South Carolina Court of Appeals, SC. The presiding judge was Hearn.
Who were the attorneys in Vick v. South Carolina Department of Transportation?
Plaintiff's attorney: Joseph S. Brockington of Charleston, for respondent.. Defendant's attorney: Christopher L. Murphy, of Stuckey Law Offices, of Charleston; and Assistant Chief Counsel Glennith C. Johnson, of Columbia, for appellant..
When was Vick v. South Carolina Department of Transportation decided?
This case was decided on October 15, 2001.