Smith v. Widener
397 S.C. 468
| S.C. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- James Donald Epting designated Sandra Smith as beneficiary of his deferred compensation account in 1985; they divorced in 1990 but the designation remained.
- Upon Epting’s death in 2006, $75,410.38 was in the account; Widener and Currie, as estate representatives, sought to waive Smith’s beneficiary rights.
- Smith signed a waiver form but contested it as forged; she also signed a beneficiary distribution form directing funds to LPL, transmitted to CitiStreet.
- CitiStreet processed Smith’s form, deposited $75,410.38 into Smith’s LPL account; Smith withdrew $40,000 and CitiStreet later issued a stop payment after reviewing claims.
- CitiStreet determined the waiver valid and sent $35,410.38 to Widener and Currie; Smith sued multiple defendants for conspiracy, conversion, slander, and negligence.
- At trial, Smith settled with CitiStreet for $35,410.38; a jury later awarded Smith $35,410.38 for conversion against Widener and Currie; setoff rights were disputed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether setoff applies when actual and punitive damages arise from the same injury | Smith contends separate injuries or claims prevent a setoff. | Widener/Currie argue same-injury rule requires setoff under §15-38-50(1). | Setoff applies; same-injury rule permits automatic setoff. |
| Whether settlement with CitiStreet was for the same injury as verdict against Widener and Currie | Settlement allocated to punitive damages only; not for same injury. | Settlement funded the same injury, justifying setoff as law. | Settlement for the same injury; setoff required by law. |
| Whether the allocation of CitiStreet settlement to punitive damages is credible and supported by record | Allocation to punitive damages is credible and supported. | Allocation not credibly proven; evidence shows different damages. | Record supports allocation to punitive damages; not reversible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hawkins v. Pathology Assocs. of Greenville, P.A., 330 S.C. 92 (Ct. App. 1998) (one satisfaction for an injury; setoff when settlement covers same injury)
- Ellis v. Oliver, 335 S.C. 106 (Ct. App. 1999) (settlement for same injury creates right to setoff as matter of law)
- Rutland v. S.C. Dep’t of Transp., 390 S.C. 78 (Ct. App. 2010) (Rutland analysis governs allocation of settlements among claims)
- O'Neill v. Smith, 388 S.C. 246 (Sup. Ct. 2010) (punitive damages vindicate private rights; related to same-injury analysis)
- Bennett v. Spartanburg Railway, Gas & Electric Co., 97 S.C. 27 (1914) (wrongful death and survival as separate actions for separate injuries)