By: S.C. Lawyers Weekly staff//June 2, 2023
By: S.C. Lawyers Weekly staff//June 2, 2023
In a 10-page single-spaced demand letter, defendant’s law firm made inconsistent demands as to the form of the settlement check it would accept – it demanded both that the check be “issued by the insurance company” and that the check be either a cashier’s check or a certified bank check. Neither a cashier’s check nor a certified bank check is “issued by the insurance company.” In any event, neither defendant nor her attorneys could articulate an appropriate logical reason supporting the argument that the form of the check was essential or material to the parties’ settlement contract. The insurance company complied with the demand by tendering a manual check.
We affirm summary judgment for the insurance company.
Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance Co. v. Hamilton (Lawyers Weekly No. 012-021-23, 7 pp.) (Per Curiam) Appealed from Florence County Circuit Court (Michael Nettles, J.) Eric Marc Poulin, Roy Willey and Angeline Larrivee for appellant; Alfred Johnston Cox for respondent. South Carolina Court of Appeals (unpublished)