CAROLINA WALK, LLC v. RICHLAND COUNTY ASSESSOR, 2014-MO-016. (2014)
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Number: inscco20140604628
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jun. 04, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 2014
Summary: THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. PER CURIAM. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Smith v. Newberry Cnty. Assessor, 350 S.C. 572 , 577-79, 567 S.E.2d 501 , 504-05 (Ct. App. 2002) (noting that in cases involving property valuation for the purpose of tax assessment, the Administrative Law Court (ALC) conducts a de novo hearing and ser
Summary: THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. PER CURIAM. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Smith v. Newberry Cnty. Assessor, 350 S.C. 572 , 577-79, 567 S.E.2d 501 , 504-05 (Ct. App. 2002) (noting that in cases involving property valuation for the purpose of tax assessment, the Administrative Law Court (ALC) conducts a de novo hearing and serv..
More
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Smith v. Newberry Cnty. Assessor, 350 S.C. 572, 577-79, 567 S.E.2d 501, 504-05 (Ct. App. 2002) (noting that in cases involving property valuation for the purpose of tax assessment, the Administrative Law Court (ALC) conducts a de novo hearing and serves as the fact-finder as to property value) (citation omitted); Risher v. S.C. Dep't of Health & Envtl. Control, 393 S.C. 198, 204-10, 712 S.E.2d 428, 431-34 (2011) (finding a decision of the ALC must be upheld if it is supported by substantial evidence in the record and noting that where conflicting evidence exists as to a factual issue, the Court's substantial evidence standard of review defers to the findings of the fact-finder).
AFFIRMED.
PLEICONES, Acting Chief Justice, BEATTY, KITTREDGE, HEARN, JJ., and Acting Justice James E. Moore, concur.
Source: Leagle
