McQueen v. South Carolina Coastal Council
South Carolina Supreme Court
580 S.E.2d 116 (2003)
- Written by Sheryl McGrath, JD
Facts
In the early 1960s, Sam McQueen (plaintiff) bought two parcels of land adjacent to a man-made saltwater canal. During the next 30 years, the land on McQueen’s parcels eroded such that much of the land became wetlands, and there was insufficient dry land to support any development. Further, critical wetland vegetation was growing on one of the parcels. In 1991, McQueen applied to a state regulatory agency (agency) (defendant) for permits to construct bulkheads on both lots. The agency did not address McQueen’s applications for two years. McQueen then reapplied for permits to backfill the lots, in addition to constructing bulkheads. The agency denied the permits on the ground that backfill and bulkheads would destroy critical wetlands on the lots. McQueen then sued the agency, claiming that the denial of the permits was a regulatory taking. A special real estate judge ruled in McQueen’s favor and granted $50,000 in damages for each lot. The agency appealed, and the South Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the judge’s ruling. The agency appealed to the South Carolina Supreme Court. The state supreme court reversed the lower courts on the ground that extant wetlands regulations defeated any investment interest McQueen had in the lots. McQueen appealed to the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court vacated the state supreme court’s decision and remanded the case for consideration on the basis of a recent United States Supreme Court decision involving a regulatory-taking claim in Rhode Island.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moore, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.