 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Andrade v. Johnson3/19/2001
." Id. (quoting Shipes v. Piggly Wiggly St. Andrews, Inc., 269 S.C. 479, 483, 238 S.E.2d 167, 168 (1977)). "The existence of a duty owed is a question of law for the courts." Washington v. Lexington County Jail, 337 S.C. 400, 405, 523 S.E.2d 204, 206 (Ct. App. 1999).
As the court in Hubbard stated, "an affirmative legal duty to act may be created by statute, contract, relationship, status, property interest, or some other special circumstance." 339 S.C. at 589, 529 S.E.2d at 552 (emphasis added).
Andrade argues the court erred in holding SCE&G;did not owe her a duty under the Quality Dealer Program. Viewing the record in the light most favorable to Andrade, we agree. The evidence raises the inference SCE&G;owed a duty of care to Andrade to ensure the proper installation of her HVAC systems.
SCE&G;s Quality Dealer Program Guidelines stated "SCE&G;s HVAC Quality Dealer Program is designed to encourage proper installation of high efficiency heating and cooling systems. The program incorporates high standards of system design, installation, and maintenance." (emphasis added).
Under the agreement between SCE&G;and its Quality Dealers, the Quality Dealers agreed to meet and adhere to all installation requirements, mediation procedures, and to abide by the inspection policy. In turn, SCE&G;agreed to promote high efficiency HVAC equipment and quality HVAC installations to its customers.
The program agreement further contained a long list of installation requirements that must be met by each Quality Dealer. The agreement also required Quality Dealers to have certain credentials, provide prompt service to all customers, and to participate in yearly training provided by SCE&G; The agreement further committed SCE&G;to a specific procedure involving mediation toward the handling of customer complaints which set forth specific requirements for certain action to be taken and concluded that discrepancies were expected to be corrected within thirty days after their report.
We conclude the Quality Dealer Agreement provides evidence of a contractual duty undertaken by SCE&G;to oversee the proper installation of HVAC systems and to address customer complaints regarding improper installation. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Andrade, we find the trial court committed reversible error in granting SCE&G;a directed verdict on Andrade's negligence claim.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the trial court is hereby AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
HOWARD and SHULER, JJ., concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 South Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|