Hamiter v. Retirement Div. of the South Carolina Budget and Control Bd., 24603
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | BURNETT; FINNEY |
| Citation | 326 S.C. 93,484 S.E.2d 586 |
| Parties | Ann Gell HAMITER, Appellant, v. The RETIREMENT DIVISION OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA BUDGET AND CONTROL BOARD and the South Carolina State Senate, Defendants, of whom the South Carolina State Senate is Respondent. . Heard |
| Docket Number | No. 24603,24603 |
| Decision Date | 09 January 1997 |
Page 586
v.
The RETIREMENT DIVISION OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA BUDGET AND
CONTROL BOARD and the South Carolina State Senate,
Defendants,
of whom the South Carolina State Senate is Respondent.
Decided April 21, 1997.
[326 S.C. 94] Anne M. Bell, of Sumter; and Clifford O. Koon, Jr., of Rogers, Townsend & Thomas, PC, Columbia, for appellant.
D. Reece Williams, III, and David W. Robinson, II, Columbia, for respondent.
BURNETT, Justice.
Ann Gell Hamiter appeals the grant of summary judgment to the South Carolina Senate (Senate). We affirm.
Hamiter, a Senate employee, was directly employed by Senator John Lindsay. Upon his death in January 1991, she was notified her employment would terminate on February 1, 1991.
[326 S.C. 95] At the time of termination of her employment, Hamiter was suffering from various
Page 587
illnesses. According to Hamiter, she has been disabled since 1987 due to these medical problems. The Senate does not dispute her disability.Hamiter alleges, upon her inquiry in 1991, Frank Caggiano, the Clerk of the Senate, who supervises all Senate employees, and Jean Padgett, Personnel Director of the Senate, failed to inform her about disability retirement and long-term disability benefits even though both of them were aware of Hamiter's medical problems. Hamiter claims these employees were under a duty to inform her of these benefits when she consulted them about possible benefits.
On January 22, 1992, Mr. Purvis Collins, Director of the Retirement Division, told Hamiter disability benefits were available; however, she was no longer eligible because she had not applied for the benefits within 90 days of her termination. In 1993, Hamiter consulted an attorney who advised her Mr. Collins could waive the 90 day requirement, and thus, she could receive the benefits. Subsequently, with the help of her attorney, Hamiter was awarded her disability benefits, including retroactive pay. However, Hamiter contends she suffered damages of insurance premiums and medical expenses which would have been avoided had she been enrolled in the State's disability plan.
In her complaint Hamiter alleges three causes of action: (1) the Senate failed to advise Hamiter, as required by the Retirement Act or as required as trustee of the retirement funds, of the availability of disability retirement benefits: (2) Hamiter requested...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Myrtle Beach Hosp. v. City of Myrtle Beach
...fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Hamiter v. Retirement Div. of the S.C. Budget & Control Bd., 326 S.C. 93, 96, 484 S.E.2d 586, 587 (1997). "In determining whether any triable issues of fact exist, the evidence and all inferences which can be reasonably......
-
Hendricks v. Clemson University, 25606.
...and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Hamiter v. Retirement Div. of South Carolina Budget and Control Bd., 326 S.C. 93, 484 S.E.2d 586 (1997). In determining whether any triable issues of fact exist, the evidence and all reasonable inferences must 353 S.C. 456 be ......
-
Garvin v. Bi-Lo, Inc., 3057.
...favorable to the non-moving party. Summer v. Carpenter, 328 S.C. 36, 492 S.E.2d 55 (1997); Hamiter v. Retirement Div. of South Carolina, 326 S.C. 93, 484 S.E.2d 586 (1997); City of Columbia v. American Civil Liberties Union, 323 S.C. 384, 475 S.E.2d 747 LAW/ANALYSIS Garvin contends the tria......
-
Bishop v. SC Dept. of Mental Health, 24799.
...the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Hamiter v. Retirement Division of South Carolina Budget and Control Board, 326 S.C. 93, 484 S.E.2d 586 (1997). In determining 331 S.C. 86 whether any triable issues of fact exist, the evidence and all inferences which can be reaso......