Carter v. American Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 1271
| Court | Court of Appeals of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | SHAW |
| Citation | 375 S.E.2d 356,297 S.C. 218 |
| Parties | Richard E. CARTER, Appellant, v. AMERICAN MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. . Heard |
| Docket Number | No. 1271,1271 |
| Decision Date | 15 November 1988 |
Page 356
v.
AMERICAN MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.
Decided Dec. 15, 1988.
Page 357
[297 S.C. 219] Ray L. Derrick, of Funderburk & Derrick, Columbia, for appellant.
Jeter E. Rhodes, Jr. and G.D. Morgan, Jr., both of Whaley, McCutchen, Blanton & Rhodes, Columbia, for respondent.
SHAW, Judge:
Appellant, Richard E. Carter, sued respondent, American Mutual Fire Insurance Company, for breach of contract and bad faith refusal to pay insurance benefits arising from the insurance company's denial of Carter's claim under a fire insurance policy. The jury returned a verdict for the insurance company. From a denial of Carter's motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, Carter appeals. We affirm.
In ruling on a trial judge's denial of motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, we must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party and we are not at liberty to pass upon the veracity of the witnesses and determine the case according to our view of the weight of the evidence. Graham v. Whitaker, 282 S.C. 393, 321 S.E.2d 40 (1984). Our task is to determine whether sufficient evidence existed warranting submission of the case to the jury. Woodward v. Todd, 270 S.C. 82, 240 S.E.2d 641 (1978). A review of the record in the light most favorable to the insurance company reveals the following:
On November 10, 1980, a fire occurred at the home of Mr. Carter. On that day, he left his home between 6:00 and 7:00 p.m. to help an employee with car trouble. Mrs. Carter and her daughter left the home sometime after Mr. Carter and went to a friend's house where the Carters were invited for dinner. Unable to repair the employee's car, Mr. Carter returned to his home and allowed the employee to take his [297 S.C. 220] car. The employee testified they arrived at the home around 9:30 p.m. Mr. Carter called his wife who picked him up and drove him to their friend's house. The fire was discovered at approximately 11:00 p.m. Mr. Carter returned home around 12:30 a.m.
The evidence also reveals Mr. Carter was experiencing financial difficulties at the time of the fire. His home had been listed for sale for over a year and was still for sale at the time of the fire. There were two mortgages on the home. He also had both a federal and state tax lien filed...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Allstate Ins. Co.
...See Rutledge v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 286 S.C. 360, 334 S.E.2d 131 (Ct.App.1985). In Carter v. American Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 297 S.C. 218, 375 S.E.2d 356 (Ct.App.1988), this Court set forth the elements of civil arson: "`An insurance company can prevail in an arson defense based......
-
State v. Harry, 2461
...... Because the fire kept re-igniting, it took almost an hour to ...278] Id. at 529; cf. Evans v. Wabash Life Ins. Co., 247 S.C. 464, 148 S.E.2d 153 (1966) ...Carter v. American Mutual Fire Ins. Co., 297 S.C. 218, ......
-
Brown v. Allstate Ins. Co., 25253.
...the preponderance of the evidence the fire was of an incendiary origin, and the insured caused the fire. Carter v. Am. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 297 S.C. 218, 375 S.E.2d 356 (Ct.App.1988). An insurer can prevail in an arson defense based solely on circumstantial evidence if it shows the fire was ......
-
State v. Lollis, 25240.
...weeks prior to fire, and defendant provided his insurer with false information concerning his losses); Carter v. Am. Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 297 S.C. 218, 375 S.E.2d 356 (Ct.App.1988) (trial judge correctly denied motion for directed verdict where there was evidence of defendant's financial dif......