Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Campbell v. Carr

South Carolina Court of Appeals
603 S.E.2d 625 (2004)


Facts

Martha Carr (defendant) inherited a 108-acre tract of land in 1996. Carr had suffered from schizophrenia and depression since 1986. Individuals with schizophrenia could experience delusions and hallucinations and display grossly disorganized or catatonic behavior. Additionally, schizophrenia caused disorganized thinking. Raymond Campbell (plaintiff) and his wife had leased the inherited property for approximately 30 years. Before selling the property, Carr contacted the Campbells to ask about the sale price of the land, and the Campbells responded that the tax assessor’s agricultural assessed value of the land was $54,000. The Campbells did not disclose that the tax assessor had calculated the fair market value of the property at $103,700. The lower assessment was used as long as the property was being used for agricultural purposes. Carr entered into a written contract to sell the property to the Campbells for $54,000. However, Carr later felt that the price was unfair and refused to close on the transaction. Carr then conveyed an undivided one-half interest in the inherited property to her cousin, Ruth Glover (defendant). The lender for the Campbells noted that the property would likely sell for 25 to 40 percent higher than the tax assessor’s fair-market-value assessment. Campbell sued Carr and Glover, seeking specific performance of the contract. A real-estate expert testified that the fair market value of the property was $162,000. The trial court granted specific performance to Campbell, and Carr and Glover appealed to the South Carolina Court of Appeals.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Anderson, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.