Linda Mc Co., Inc. v. Shore
703 S.E.2d 499
S.C.2010Background
- Judgment by confession entered June 2, 1995 for $110,000, plus costs and fees, against Petitioners; signed by petitioners and their oath verified.
- Petitioners paid $55,000; later a 2004 agreement proposed waiving post-judgment interest if $55,000 paid by May 7, 2004; partial payment of $26,750 followed.
- Respondent filed supplemental proceedings July 29, 2004; a special referee held hearings in 2004–2005 to locate assets for levy.
- Special referee found judgment valid; Petitioners argued the February 20, 2004 agreement was modified by a May 2004 phone message; trial court issued an order to execute June 3, 2005.
- Court of Appeals held: no void judgment for lack of affidavit, issue preservation problems, no accord and satisfaction, estoppel not preserved.
- SC Supreme Court affirmed the appellate ruling with modification, holding 15-39-30 not a pure statute of limitations and extending active energy for enforcement under these facts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Void entry for not following fixed amount terms | Linda Mc argues failure to fix amount voids entry | Shore argues lack of mandatory affidavit voids judgment | Affidavit permissive; entry not void; preserved |
| Section 15-39-30 active energy | Shore claims statute of repose terminates enforcement after 10 years | Linda Mc contends ten-year period is not active energy extension | Not a statute of limitations; under these facts, active energy extended to enforcement order |
| Accord and satisfaction existence | Modification via Jan's message shows accord | No meeting of the minds; no accord | No accord and satisfaction; evidence supports referee |
| Estoppel from modification indication | Respondent estopped by failure to respond to phone message | Not preserved; trial court not ruled | Issue not preserved for review |
| Mootness | Expiration moots the case | Contests preservation and ongoing dispute | There remains an actual controversy; not moot |
Key Cases Cited
- Hardee v. Lynch, 212 S.C. 6 (1948) (statute of repose extinguishes judgment after ten years)
- Garrison v. Owens, 258 S.C. 442 (1972) (enforcement action cannot prolong a judgment beyond fixed time)
- LaRosa v. Johnston, 328 S.C. 293 (Ct.App.1997) (preservation requirement for issues raised on appeal)
- United States Rubber Co. v. McManus, 211 S.C. 342 (1947) (historical basis for ten-year revival and revival mechanics)