O'NEILL v. Smith
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Beatty
The question certified to this Court asks whether it would violate South Carolina’s public policy for a plaintiff to seek an award of punitive damages in a tort action after signing a covenant not to execute against a defendant. We answer in the negative, holding it does not violate public policy because punitive damages serve additional purposes beyond merely punishing a specific individual, and the public policy as expressed in S.C.Code Ann. § 38-77-30(4) (2002) is to compensate the injured insured, not his insurer, and requires only that damages exceed the liability insurance limits of an…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Clark v. CantrellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2000
- Rogers Ex Rel. Rogers v. Florence Printing Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1958
- Stinbrink v. Farmers Ins. Co. of ArizonaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1990
- Sloan Ex Rel. State v. Friends of the Hunley, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
- Floyd v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. KennedySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2012
- Gause v. SmithersSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2013
- Government Employees Insurance Company v. PooleSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2018