Pye v. Estate of Fox ex rel. Estate of Fox, 369 S.C. 555

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Carolina affirmed summary judgment dismissing a civil conspiracy claim against an attorney and a directed verdict for the remaining defendants. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to present evidence of an agreement among the defendants to injure them, an essential element of civil conspiracy. The court also addressed preservation of appellate issues concerning an attorney's alleged independent duty and conduct outside the scope of representation.

Holdings

1. The Pyes' theory that Hill breached an independent duty arising from Rule 11, SCRCP, and the barratry statute was not preserved because it was raised for the first time on appeal and was not presented to or ruled upon by the circuit court.
2. An issue raised at the summary-judgment hearing and again in a Rule 59(e) motion is preserved even if the circuit court does not specifically rule on that issue at the Rule 59(e) hearing.
3. Summary judgment for Hill was proper because the Pyes failed to produce evidence of an agreement between Hill and the Foxes to injure the Pyes, an essential element of civil conspiracy.
4. The directed verdict for the Foxes was proper because the Pyes presented no evidence of an agreement by Hill and the Foxes to injure them, a necessary element of civil conspiracy.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment dismissing the civil-conspiracy claim against Hill.
2. Whether the circuit court erred in directing a verdict for the Foxes on the civil-conspiracy claim.
3. Whether the Pyes' theory that Hill owed them an independent duty based on Rule 11, SCRCP, and the barratry statute was preserved for appellate review.
4. Whether the Pyes preserved their alternative theory that Hill acted outside the scope of his professional duties and in his own interest.

Disposition

affirmed