Bank v. Coffey, 4685.

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
Citation698 S.E.2d 244,389 S.C. 68
Decision Date06 May 2010
Docket NumberNo. 4685.,4685.
PartiesWACHOVIA BANK, N.A., Appellant,v.Ann T. COFFEY and Bank of America, N.A., Respondents.

389 S.C. 68
698 S.E.2d 244

WACHOVIA BANK, N.A., Appellant,
v.
Ann T. COFFEY and Bank of America, N.A., Respondents.

No. 4685.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard Feb. 9, 2010.
Decided May 6, 2010.
Rehearing Denied Sept. 16, 2010.


698 S.E.2d 245
James Y. Becker and R. David Proffitt, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Gregory M. Alford, of Hilton Head Island, for Respondent Ann. T. Coffey.

Steven R. Anderson, of Columbia, for Respondent Bank of America, N.A.

GEATHERS, J.

Appellant Wachovia Bank, N.A. (Wachovia), brought this mortgage foreclosure action against Respondents Ann T. Coffey (Mrs. Coffey) and Bank of America, N.A., seeking relief from Mrs. Coffey's default on a home equity loan made to her late husband for the purchase of a sailboat. The master-in-equity granted Mrs. Coffey's summary judgment motion and denied Wachovia's summary judgment motion. Wachovia challenges both the grant of summary judgment to Mrs. Coffey and the denial of its summary judgment motion on its unjust enrichment, equitable lien, and prejudgment interest causes of action on the ground that it proved the required elements of these causes of action. Wachovia also challenges the grant of summary judgment to Mrs. Coffey on its ratification and foreclosure causes of action on the ground that there were material factual issues preventing summary judgment. We affirm.

FACTS/PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On January 27, 2001, Dr. Michael D. Coffey (Dr. Coffey), a Hilton Head obstetrician,

698 S.E.2d 246
was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer and was told that he had six months to live. On July 23, 2001, Dr. Coffey took out a $125,000 home equity line of credit with Wachovia. Mrs. Coffey was not aware of the transaction, and Wachovia's employees failed to verify Dr. Coffey's authority to mortgage the couple's home. Dr. Coffey signed a mortgage document purporting to secure the loan with the couple's home, which was titled in Mrs. Coffey's name only. On July 30, 2001, at Dr. Coffey's request, Wachovia wired the loan proceeds to the Hilton Head branch of Carolina First Bank to be deposited in the account of Hilton Head Yachts, Ltd., a business that had sold to Dr. Coffey a thirty- six-foot Beneteau sailboat (the boat). The Boat was then titled in the name of A & M Partners, Inc., a Delaware corporation in which Dr. Coffey and Mrs. Coffey were the only shareholders. Dr. Coffey told Mrs. Coffey that the boat was “paid for.” Dr. Coffey, who handled virtually all of the couple's financial transactions, used the couple's joint checking account to make payments on the loan until his death in March 2005.

Soon after Dr. Coffey's death, Mrs. Coffey began a months-long effort to sell the boat. She continued the payments on the loan from Wachovia, but for several months she was unaware that the loan was for the boat purchase. She testified that by the fall of 2005, she realized that these payments related to Dr. Coffey's boat purchase but that she was under the impression that the loan was secured by a lien on the boat, rather than a mortgage on their home, and that the amount of the loan was much smaller than it actually was.

In September 2005, Mrs. Coffey hired a broker to locate a buyer for the boat. By late November 2005, the broker located a buyer, and on January 5, 2006, the broker prepared an initial seller's disbursement summary showing the balance of Wachovia's boat loan to Dr. Coffey. However, the final seller's disbursement summary did not reflect the debt owed to Wachovia. According to Mrs. Coffey, she had given the boat loan information to the broker, but the broker contacted Wachovia and learned that there was “no lien” on the boat and that the sale proceeds could be transferred to A & M Partners, Inc., the corporation in which she and Dr. Coffey held stock. Ultimately, Mrs. Coffey received the net proceeds of the sale, and she deposited them into one of her bank accounts.

Mrs. Coffey also stated that shortly after the closing of the boat sale in January 2006, she realized that Dr. Coffey had purchased the boat with loan proceeds from a home equity line of credit and that he had signed a mortgage purportedly securing the debt with their home. Mrs. Coffey indicated that she became angry at Wachovia's employees about the transaction taking place without her knowledge and refused to make any further payments on the loan.

Wachovia later filed this mortgage foreclosure action against Mrs. Coffey. In its initial complaint filed on June 30, 2006, Wachovia originally named as defendants Dr. Coffey's estate, Mrs. Coffey, both individually and as personal representative of Dr. Coffey's estate, and three of the couple's five children. Wachovia filed an amended complaint on May 9, 2008, to name as defendants only Mrs. Coffey and Bank of America, N.A. In the meantime, Mrs. Coffey had filed with the Beaufort County Probate Court an inventory and appraisement of Dr. Coffey's estate in September 2006. The inventory and appraisement acknowledged Dr. Coffey's and Mrs. Coffey's joint ownership of the boat. The inventory and appraisement also...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Stalvey v. Am. Bank Holdings, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • 13 Noviembre 2013
    ...336 S.C. 373, 387, 520 S.E.2d 142, 149 (1999). Plaintiff cites two more recent South Carolina cases, Wachovia Bank v. Coffey, 389 S.C. 68, 698 S.E.2d 244 (S.C.Ct.App. 2010) and Matrix Financial Services Corp. v. Frazer, 394 S.C. 134, 714 S.E.2d 532 (2011) in support of her argument that Def......
  • Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. JT Walker Indus., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • 10 Febrero 2014
    ...and MI's obligation to pay the deductible amounts, beyond the bounds of its contractual duties. See Wachovia Bank, N.A. v. Coffey, 698 S.E.2d 244 (S.C. Ct. App. 2010) (lender's unauthorized practice of law precludes recovery for the consequences of that act); Jackson v. Bi-Lo Stores, Inc., ......
  • Matrix Financial Serv. Corp.. v. Frazer
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • 8 Agosto 2011
    ...constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. Buyers Serv., 292 S.C. at 430–34, 357 S.E.2d at 17–19. In Wachovia Bank v. Coffey, 389 S.C. 68, 698 S.E.2d 244 (Ct.App.2010), Wachovia closed a home equity loan without the supervision of an attorney and later instituted foreclosure proceedings.......
  • Davis v. SCBT, N.A. (In re Davis), C/A No. 11-06003-dd
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of South Carolina
    • 31 Julio 2013
    ...a husband took out a home equity line of credit secured by real property titled in the wife's name only. Wachovia Bank, N.A. v. Coffey, 698 S.E.2d 244, 246 (S.C. Ct. App. 2010), affirmed as modified, -- S.E.2d --, No. 2010-174086, 2013 WL 3461691, at *3 (S.C. July 10, 2013). After the husba......
  • 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