Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1985

Queen's Grant Villas Horizontal Property Regimes I-V v. Daniel International Corp.

Supreme Court of South Carolina · Decided October 1, 1985 · Harwell, Littlejohn, Ness, Gregory, Chandler

335 S.E.2d 365; 286 S.C. 555; 1985 S.C. LEXIS 497 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

11 later published cases cite this decision.

Greenstein v. Council of Unit Owners of Avalon Court Six Condominium, Inc. (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2011)
Pinckney v. Epcon Communities (S.C. Ct. App. 2015)
Fisher v. Shipyard Village Council of Co-Owners, Inc. (S.C. Ct. App. 2014)
Auto-Owners Insurance v. Madison at Park West Property Owners Ass'n (District Court, D. South Carolina 2011)
Queen's Grant II Horizontal Property Regime v. Greenwood Development Corp. (S.C. Ct. App. 2006)
Bardoon Properties, NV v. Eidolon Corp. (S.C. 1997)
Charleston Joint Venture v. McPherson (S.C. 1992)
Murphy v. Yacht Cove Homeowners Assoc. (S.C. 1986)
Jablonsky v. Klemm (N.D. 1985)
Tower South Property Owners Ass'n v. Summey Bldg. Systems, Inc. (4th Cir. 1995)
Dockside Assoc. v. Detyens, Simmons & Carlisle (S.C. 1985)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

Harwell, Justice:

*556 Appellants, Queen’s Grant Villas Horizontal Property Regimes I-V (the Regimes), brought these actions against respondents for alleged defects in the construction of the common elements of a condominum project. The lower court granted respondent’s motion for summary judgment, finding the Regimes lacked standing to maintain the actions. We reverse.

A property regime has standing to bring an action for construction defects in common elements that the regime has the duty to maintain. Roundtree Villas Ass’n v. 4701 Kings Corp., 282 S. C. 415, 321 S. E. (2d) 46 (1984). In this case, the master deeds and the by-laws incorporated therein show that the Regime has the obligation to maintain the common elements. Should the Regime not uphold its duty to pursue a recovery for any alleged construction defects, in the common elements which it maintains, it may be liable to the homeowners for its omissions.

The effect of our opinion is to overrule the Court of Appeals’ decision in Dockside Ass’n v. Detyens, __ S. C. __, 330 S. E. (2d) 537 (S. C. App. 1985), which erroneously stated that a regime has no standing to maintain an action unless it owns the common elements.

Reversed and remanded.

Littlejohn, C. J., and Ness, Gregory and Chandler, J J., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.