Camp v. Components, Inc.

Decision Date21 March 1985
Docket NumberNo. 0462,0462
Citation285 S.C. 443,330 S.E.2d 315
PartiesMartha L. CAMP, Respondent, v. COMPONENTS, INC., Appellant. . Heard
CourtSouth Carolina Court of Appeals

Earl R. Gatlin, of Hayes, Brunson & Gatlin, Rock Hill, for appellant.

W. Ryan Hovis and David R. Duncan, of Hovis & Duncan, Rock Hill, for respondent.

SANDERS, Chief Judge:

Respondent Martha L. Camp brought this tort action against appellant Components, Inc. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Ms. Camp for actual and punitive damages. Components appeals only as to the award of punitive damages. We affirm.

In considering this appeal, our jurisdiction extends only to the corrections of errors of law. Moran v. Jones, 281 S.C. 270, 315 S.E.2d 136 (Ct.App.1984). We cannot reverse the verdict of a jury unless the only reasonable inference which can be drawn from the evidence is contrary to the factual findings implicit in the verdict. Willis v. Floyd Brace Co., 279 S.C. 458, 309 S.E.2d 295 (Ct.App.1983).

The evidence here may be summarized as follows. A truck driver for Components became lost and drove a large, fully loaded truck into a residential neighborhood. The driver drove past no trespassing signs down a steep, unpaved road leading to Ms. Camp's home. He then got out of the truck to seek directions, leaving it unattended on the incline behind her car. The truck immediately began to roll forward. The driver returned to it and applied the brakes, but not before it had crashed into Ms. Camp's car, pushing it within inches of her home.

A plaintiff is entitled to recover punitive damages if the act complained of is determined to be willful, wanton or reckless. Fennell v. Littlejohn, 240 S.C. 189, 125 S.E.2d 408 (1962). Punitive damages are allowed even "when the wrongdoer does not actually realize that he is invading the rights of another, provided the act is committed in such a manner that a person of ordinary prudence would say that it was a reckless disregard of another's rights." Hicks v. McCandlish, 221 S.C. 410, 415-16, 70 S.E.2d 629, 631 (1952).

In our opinion, the evidence here is adequate to support the jury's verdict for punitive damage. The jury could have found that a person of ordinary prudence would say it was a reckless disregard of Ms. Camp's rights for Component's driver to drive a large, fully loaded truck past no trespassing signs and then leave it unattended on a steep incline behind her car.

Accordingly, the judgment for Ms. Camp is

A...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Blanton Enterprises, Inc. v. Burger King Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • February 26, 1988
    ...In addition, punitive damages are only available where defendant's conduct is willful, wanton, or reckless. Camp v. Components, Inc., 285 S.C. 443, 330 S.E.2d 315 (Ct.App.1985); A. T. Sistance Construction Co., 236 S.C. 125, 113 S.E.2d 341 (1960) (Ct.App.1985). As is clear from the court's ......
  • DEFENDER INDUS. v. NW MUT. LIFE INS.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • December 15, 1989
    ...In South Carolina, punitive damages are recoverable if a defendant acts recklessly, willfully or wantonly. Camp v. Components, Inc., 285 S.C. 443, 330 S.E.2d 315 (Ct.App.1985); Fox v. Munnerlyn, 283 S.C. 490, 323 S.E.2d 68 (Ct. App.1984). The Court first concludes there is sufficient eviden......
  • Ralph v. McLaughlin
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • August 21, 2019
    ...Fairchild v. S.C. Dep't of Transp. , 385 S.C. 344, 353–54, 683 S.E.2d 818, 823 (Ct. App. 2009) (quoting Camp v. Components, Inc. , 285 S.C. 443, 444, 330 S.E.2d 315, 316 (Ct. App. 1985) )."When ruling on a directed verdict motion as to punitive damages, ‘the circuit court must view the evid......
  • City of Greenville v. WR Grace & Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • June 11, 1986
    ...791 (1986) (punitive damages affirmed in a "minor vehicular collision" causing "minimal property damage"), Camp v. Components, Inc., 285 S.C. 443, 330 S.E.2d 315 (S.C.App.1985) truck driver leaving unattended truck in residential neighborhood. See also Campus Sweater & Sportswear Co. v. M.B......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT