Argoe v. Three Rivers Behavioral Center & Psychiatric Solutions
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Dissent
*406Justice PLEICONES.
I respectfully dissent. In my view, there are genuine issues of material fact which preclude summary judgment here.
I agree that, generally, where an individual who holds a power of attorney hires an attorney, that attorney’s client is the attorney-in-fact and not the principal who executed the power. E.g., Estate of Keatinge v. Biddle, 789 A.2d 1271 (Me.2002). I also agree that, in general, an attorney who acts in good faith with the authority of his client is not liable to a third party for the performance of his professional services. E.g., Gaar v. North Myrtle Beach…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Stiles v. OnoratoSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
- Gaar v. N. Myrtle Beach Realty Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1986
- Estate of Keatinge v. BiddleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
- Loftis v. EckCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1986