Crittenden v. Thompson-Walker Co., Inc., THOMPSON-WALKER

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtBELL
Citation288 S.C. 112,341 S.E.2d 385
PartiesParnell CRITTENDEN, Respondent, v. TheCOMPANY, INC., Appellant. . Heard
Docket NumberNo. 0641,THOMPSON-WALKER,0641
Decision Date13 November 1985

Page 385

341 S.E.2d 385
288 S.C. 112
Parnell CRITTENDEN, Respondent,
v.
The THOMPSON-WALKER COMPANY, INC., Appellant.
No. 0641.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina.
Heard Nov. 13, 1985.
Decided Feb. 21, 1986.

Page 386

[288 S.C. 113] Pledger M. Bishop, Jr., of Buist, Moore, Smythe & McGee, Charleston, for appellant.

John H. Douglas, of Douglas & Douglas and Gedney M. Howe III, Charleston, for respondent.

BELL, Judge:

Parnell Crittenden, Jr., commenced this action against the Thompson-Walker Company, Inc., for injuries resulting from an assault and battery by Bobby Welch, an employee of Thompson-Walker. The circuit court entered judgment against Thompson-Walker on a jury verdict of $75,000 actual damages. Thompson-Walker appeals. We affirm.

In January 1981, Crittenden contracted with Thompson-Walker to renovate a building he was leasing as a place of business for a retail store. Thompson-Walker worked on the building until February 27, 1981. Several days prior to completion of the renovation, Thompson-Walker sent Crittenden a final approximate statement for the work. On February 26, 1981, Crittenden and his father came from their home in Wilmington, North Carolina, to Charleston and conferred with William B. Thompson, the president of Thompson-Walker, concerning the final bill for the work. No payment was made at the conclusion of that meeting. The next day, Thompson called Crittenden at the store to inquire about payment. Crittenden stated the bill would not be paid that day and, without further explanation, told Thompson to discuss the matter with Crittenden's attorney.

[288 S.C. 114] Shortly thereafter, Thompson went to Crittenden's store to pursue the matter. Before leaving his office, he told Bobby Welch, the job foreman for the Crittenden contract, that Crittenden was not going to pay the final bill and that the work was at an end. Thompson then left alone in his car to go to Crittenden's store. When he arrived, Thompson went to a small office in the rear of the store where he discussed the matter with Crittenden and his father. During the course of the discussion, Welch entered the store with several workmen. Welch testified he had come to tell a painter to cease work on the building. He claimed he brought his men to collect tools which had been left at the store. However, upon arriving at the store, he went immediately to the rear office and, in the presence of Thompson, severely beat Crittenden until the latter agreed to pay the bill. Crittenden suffered bruises about his body and permanent injury to his left eye and cheek. As a result, he was hospitalized for six days, underwent surgery, and still experiences double vision and numbness in his face.

Crittenden's complaint stated three causes of action against Thompson-Walker: (1) that Thompson-Walker is vicariously liable for the acts of its servant, Welch, who was acting within the course and scope of his employment when the beating occurred; (2) that Thompson-Walker is vicariously liable for the acts of its president, Thompson, who aided and abetted Welch in the assault; and (3) that Thompson-Walker is liable for negligence in hiring Welch and in failing to supervise him prior to and during the assault. The circuit judge struck the

Page 387

claim for negligent hiring, but permitted the case to go to the jury on the remaining theories, including negligent supervision. As there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict on the first cause of action, we find it unnecessary to consider Thompson-Walker's exceptions relating to the second and third causes of action. See Anderson v. West, 270 S.C. 184, 241 S.E.2d 551 (1978); Gold Kist, Inc. v. Citizens & Southern National Bank of South Carolina, 286 S.C. 272, 333 S.E.2d 67 (Ct.App.1985).

I.

Thompson-Walker...

To continue reading

Request your trial
38 practice notes
  • Osterhout v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Leflore Cnty., s. 20-7024 & 20-7025
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • August 24, 2021
    ...266 (1983) ; Wilson v. Patel , No. 14634, 1995 WL 39296 (Ohio Ct. App. Feb. 1, 1995) (unpublished); Crittenden v. Thompson-Walker Co. , 288 S.C. 112, 341 S.E.2d 385 (Ct. App. 1986).Four of the other six cases involve far different injuries. Azoulay v. Condo. Ass'n of La Mer Estates, Inc ., ......
  • Berkeley Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Hub Int'l Ltd., No. 2:18-cv-00151-DCN
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • January 29, 2019
    ...business." Vereen v. Liberty Life Ins. Co., 306 S.C. 423, 412 S.E.2d 425, 429 (App. 1991) (citing Crittenden v. Thompson-Walker Co., 288 S.C. 112, 341 S.E.2d 385 (App. 1986) ). But if the employee "acts for some independent purpose of his own, wholly disconnected from the furthera......
  • Osterhout v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Leflore Cnty., Okla., 20-7024
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • August 24, 2021
    ...266 (N.H. 1983); Wilson v. Patel, No. 14634, 1995 WL 39296 (Ohio Ct. App. Feb. 1, 1995) (unpublished); Crittendon v. Thompson-Walker Co., 341 S.E.2d 385 (S.C. Ct. App. 1986). Four of the other six cases involve far different injuries. Azoulay v. Condo. Ass'n of La Mer Estates, Inc., 94 So.3......
  • Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Pers. Touch Med Spa Llc, Civil Action No. 4:10–cv–683–TLW.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • January 14, 2011
    ...” even if it is outside the scope of the servant's authority. Id. at 246, 403 S.E.2d at 646 (quoting Crittenden v. Thompson–Walker Co., 288 S.C. 112, 115–16, 341 S.E.2d 385, 387 (Ct.App.1986)). In light of the narrow manner in which South Carolina courts interpret the term “arising out of” ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
38 cases
  • Osterhout v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Leflore Cnty., s. 20-7024 & 20-7025
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • August 24, 2021
    ...266 (1983) ; Wilson v. Patel , No. 14634, 1995 WL 39296 (Ohio Ct. App. Feb. 1, 1995) (unpublished); Crittenden v. Thompson-Walker Co. , 288 S.C. 112, 341 S.E.2d 385 (Ct. App. 1986).Four of the other six cases involve far different injuries. Azoulay v. Condo. Ass'n of La Mer Estates, Inc ., ......
  • Berkeley Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Hub Int'l Ltd., No. 2:18-cv-00151-DCN
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • January 29, 2019
    ...business." Vereen v. Liberty Life Ins. Co., 306 S.C. 423, 412 S.E.2d 425, 429 (App. 1991) (citing Crittenden v. Thompson-Walker Co., 288 S.C. 112, 341 S.E.2d 385 (App. 1986) ). But if the employee "acts for some independent purpose of his own, wholly disconnected from the furthera......
  • Osterhout v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Leflore Cnty., Okla., 20-7024
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • August 24, 2021
    ...266 (N.H. 1983); Wilson v. Patel, No. 14634, 1995 WL 39296 (Ohio Ct. App. Feb. 1, 1995) (unpublished); Crittendon v. Thompson-Walker Co., 341 S.E.2d 385 (S.C. Ct. App. 1986). Four of the other six cases involve far different injuries. Azoulay v. Condo. Ass'n of La Mer Estates, Inc., 94 So.3......
  • Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Pers. Touch Med Spa Llc, Civil Action No. 4:10–cv–683–TLW.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • January 14, 2011
    ...” even if it is outside the scope of the servant's authority. Id. at 246, 403 S.E.2d at 646 (quoting Crittenden v. Thompson–Walker Co., 288 S.C. 112, 115–16, 341 S.E.2d 385, 387 (Ct.App.1986)). In light of the narrow manner in which South Carolina courts interpret the term “arising out of” ......
  • 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