Aiken v. World Finance Corp. of Sc, No. 26313.
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | Toal |
| Citation | 644 S.E.2d 705 |
| Parties | Richard AIKEN, Respondent, v. WORLD FINANCE CORPORATION OF SOUTH CAROLINA & World Acceptance Corporation, Petitioners. |
| Docket Number | No. 26313. |
| Decision Date | 23 April 2007 |
v.
WORLD FINANCE CORPORATION OF SOUTH CAROLINA & World Acceptance Corporation, Petitioners.
[644 S.E.2d 706]
Judson K. Chapin, III, of Greenville, for Petitioners.
Matthew Price Turner and Rhett D. Burney, both of Turner and Burney, P.C., of Laurens, for Respondent.
Chief Justice TOAL:
Respondent Richard Aiken ("Aiken") filed a law suit against Appellants World Finance Corporation of South Carolina and World Acceptance Corporation (collectively, "World Finance") alleging various torts arising from the misuse of Aiken's personal financial information by employees of World Finance. The circuit court denied World Finance's motion to compel arbitration on the grounds that Aiken's claims were not within the scope of the arbitration clause. The court of appeals affirmed and this Court granted certiorari. We affirm as modified.
World Finance is a nationwide consumer finance company with branch offices in South Carolina. Aiken obtained a series of consumer loans from World Finance beginning in 1997 and continuing through late 1999. Aiken paid off his last loan from World Finance in 2000.
In order to apply for a loan, Aiken was required to supply non-public, personal information to World Finance, including his date of birth and social security number. Upon approval of each loan, Aiken entered into an arbitration agreement with World Finance. Each arbitration agreement provided, in relevant part:
. . . ALL DISPUTES, CONTROVERSIES OR CLAIMS OF ANY KIND AND NATURE BETWEEN LENDER AND BORROWER ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE LOAN AGREEMENT, OR ARISING OUT OF ANY TRANSACTION OR RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LENDER AND BORROWER OR ARISING OUT OF ANY PRIOR OR FUTURE DEALINGS BETWEEN LENDER AND BORROWER, SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO ARBITRATION AND SETTLED BY ARBITRATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UNTIED STATES ARBITRATION ACT, THE EXPEDITED PROCEDURES OF THE COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES OF THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION (THE "ARBITRATION RULES OF THE AAA"), AND THIS AGREEMENT.
Beginning in late 2002, several World Finance employees conspired to use the personal information provided by Aiken and other clients to obtain sham loans and embezzle the proceeds for the employees' personal benefit.1 Upon discovering the misuse of his personal information, Aiken filed suit against World Finance in the court of common pleas for Laurens County seeking damages for outrage and emotional distress, negligence, negligent hiring/supervision, and unfair trade practices. World Finance filed an answer, a motion to dismiss, and a motion to compel arbitration.
The trial court found that the effectiveness of the arbitration agreement ceased when the relationship of the parties ended. Because Aiken paid off his last loan with World Finance prior to the tortious acts of the employees, the court concluded that Aiken's tort claims were completely independent of the loan agreements and not subject to the arbitration agreements. Therefore, the court denied World Finance's motions to compel arbitration.
The court of appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court. See Aiken v. World Finance Corp. of South Carolina, 367 S.C. 176, 623 S.E.2d 873 (Ct.App.2005). This Court granted certiorari and World Finance raises the following issues for review:
I. Did the court of appeals err in deciding whether Aiken's underlying claims were subject to arbitration without first submitting the issue to an arbitrator?
II. Did the court of appeals err in finding that Aiken's claims were not significantly related to the underlying loan agreement and therefore not within the scope of arbitration?
The determination of whether a claim is subject to arbitration is subject to de novo review. Wellman, Inc. v. Square D Co., 366 S.C. 61, 67, 620 S.E.2d 86, 89 (Ct. App.2005). Nevertheless, a circuit court's factual findings will not be reversed on appeal if any evidence reasonably supports the findings. Thornton v. Trident Med. Ctr., L.L.C., 357 S.C. 91, 94, 592 S.E.2d 50, 51 (Ct.App.2003).
World Finance argues that under the terms of the arbitration agreement, arbitration
is the proper forum for determining the scope of the arbitration agreement. Therefore, World Finance claims that the court of appeals erred in determining whether the arbitration agreement covered Aiken's claims without first submitting the issue to an arbitrator. We find that this issue is not properly preserved for review.
In order to be preserved for appellate review, an issue must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial court. Pye v. Estate of Fox, 369 S.C. 555, 564, 633 S.E.2d 505, 510 (2006). World Finance made no argument regarding the proper forum for determining the arbitrability of the underlying claims in either its motion to compel arbitration or in the hearing before the circuit court. Instead, World Finance's argument focused solely on the merits of the motion (i.e., whether Aiken's claims were within the scope of the arbitration agreement). Consequently, the trial court's order only addresses whether the scope of the arbitration agreement encompasses the underlying claims.
We agree with the court of appeals that the issue of the proper forum for determining the scope of the arbitration agreement is not properly preserved for review. Accordingly, the court of appeals did not err in deciding the question of whether Aiken's underlying claims were within the scope of the arbitration agreement.
World Finance argues that the court of appeals erred in finding that Aiken's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Parsons v. Homes, Appellate Case No. 2014–000782
...opponent's “outrageous” tortious conduct to avoid arbitration. See generally Aiken v. World Fin. Corp. of South Carolina , 373 S.C. 144, 644 S.E.2d 705 (2007) (establishing, in South Carolina, the outrageous torts exception to arbitration enforcement). The exception established that outrage......
-
Arnold v. Burger King, No. 101465.
...at 1516.{¶ 35} The South Carolina Supreme Court considered arbitration of an intentional tort in Aiken v. World Fin. Corp., 373 S.C. 144, 644 S.E.2d 705 (2007). The question in Aiken was whether a lender could require a consumer to be bound by an arbitration clause contained in the loan doc......
-
Clay v. N.M. Title Loans, Inc., No. 31,356.
...was not sufficient to compel arbitration). {22} We find the reasoning in Aiken v. World Fin. Corp. of South Carolina, 373 S.C. 144, 644 S.E.2d 705 (2007), most persuasive. The plaintiff, Mr. Aiken, obtained several loans from World Finance Corporation. Id. at 707. In his loan applications, ......
-
Hodge v. Unihealth Post-Acute Care of Bamberg, LLC, Appellate Case No. 2015-001183
...the circuit court's factual findings, this court will not reverse those findings. Aiken v. World Fin. Corp. of S.C. , 373 S.C. 144, 148, 644 S.E.2d 705, 707 (2007).LAW/ANALYSISI. Reliance on Unpublished Opinion Appellants maintain the circuit court erred by denying their motion to compel ar......
-
Parsons v. Homes, Appellate Case No. 2014–000782
...opponent's “outrageous” tortious conduct to avoid arbitration. See generally Aiken v. World Fin. Corp. of South Carolina , 373 S.C. 144, 644 S.E.2d 705 (2007) (establishing, in South Carolina, the outrageous torts exception to arbitration enforcement). The exception established that outrage......
-
Arnold v. Burger King, No. 101465.
...at 1516.{¶ 35} The South Carolina Supreme Court considered arbitration of an intentional tort in Aiken v. World Fin. Corp., 373 S.C. 144, 644 S.E.2d 705 (2007). The question in Aiken was whether a lender could require a consumer to be bound by an arbitration clause contained in the loan doc......
-
Clay v. N.M. Title Loans, Inc., No. 31,356.
...was not sufficient to compel arbitration). {22} We find the reasoning in Aiken v. World Fin. Corp. of South Carolina, 373 S.C. 144, 644 S.E.2d 705 (2007), most persuasive. The plaintiff, Mr. Aiken, obtained several loans from World Finance Corporation. Id. at 707. In his loan applications, ......
-
Hodge v. Unihealth Post-Acute Care of Bamberg, LLC, Appellate Case No. 2015-001183
...the circuit court's factual findings, this court will not reverse those findings. Aiken v. World Fin. Corp. of S.C. , 373 S.C. 144, 148, 644 S.E.2d 705, 707 (2007).LAW/ANALYSISI. Reliance on Unpublished Opinion Appellants maintain the circuit court erred by denying their motion to compel ar......