McDonnell & Associates v. First Citizens Bank ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
    CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
    EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
    THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
    In The Court of Appeals
    McDonnell and Associates, PA, f/k/a McDonnell Law
    Firm, PA, f/k/a Edward G. McDonnell, PC, and
    Boomerang Title, Inc., Appellants,
    v.
    First Citizens Bank and Trust Company, Inc.,
    Respondent.
    Appellate Case No. 2010-172106
    Appeal From Richland County
    J. Michelle Childs, Circuit Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-404
    Heard May 9, 2012 – Filed July 11, 2012
    AFFIRMED
    L. Henry McKellar and Amy L. Neuschafer, of Collins &
    Lacy, PC, of Columbia, for Appellants.
    Wesley F. Few and Jake S. Barker, of Ellis Lawhorne
    & Sims, PA, of Columbia, for Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: McDonnell and Associates, PA, and Boomerang Title, Inc.,
    (collectively, "McDonnell") appeal from the circuit court's order granting summary
    judgment in favor of First Citizens Bank and Trust Company, Inc. ("First
    Citizens") for McDonnell's failure to produce evidence demonstrating First
    Citizens' lack of ordinary care. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR,
    and the following authorities: 
    S.C. Code Ann. § 36-4-406
    (3) (2003)1 ("The
    preclusion under subsection (2) does not apply if the customer establishes lack of
    ordinary care on the part of the bank in paying the item(s).") (emphasis added);
    Read v. S.C. Nat'l Bank, 
    286 S.C. 534
    , 540, 
    335 S.E.2d 359
    , 362 (1985) ("The
    burden of proving the bank's failure to exercise ordinary care under § 36-4-406(3)
    in paying the items rests squarely on the customer."); § 36-4-406 official cmt. 4
    (2003) ("[E]ven if the bank succeeds in establishing that the customer has failed to
    exercise ordinary care, if in turn the customer succeeds in establishing the bank
    failed to exercise ordinary care in paying the item(s), the preclusion rule does not
    apply.") (emphasis added).
    AFFIRMED.
    WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
    1
    The negotiated checks occurred before the effective date of the 2008 amendment
    to section 36-4-406. Accordingly, the pre-2008 version of section 36-4-406 is
    applicable and cited herein.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2012-UP-404

Filed Date: 7/11/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/22/2024