The following is a list of some of the verdicts and settlements Steve has obtained on behalf of his clients. Each case is different, however, and these results should not be interpreted as a guarantee that like results will be achieved in each case.
jury verdicts
Strock v. Southern Farm Bureau
Practice Area: Insurance
Description: Dr. Strock owned a house on the front beach of Folly Beach. Hurricane Hugo moved the house to the back of the lot. Southern Farm Bureau refused to pay the policy limits stating that most of the damage was done when the tidal surge came on shore. At trial, a computer generated animation was used to show how the house was damaged during the storm. It was the first time in the country a computer animation was used in the courtroom to show the effects of a hurricane. The use of the animation was upheld on appeal by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Outcome: Jury verdict in favor of Dr. Strock in the amount of $46,001.50.
Practice Area: Insurance
Description: Dr. Strock owned a house on the front beach of Folly Beach. Hurricane Hugo moved the house to the back of the lot. Southern Farm Bureau refused to pay the policy limits stating that most of the damage was done when the tidal surge came on shore. At trial, a computer generated animation was used to show how the house was damaged during the storm. It was the first time in the country a computer animation was used in the courtroom to show the effects of a hurricane. The use of the animation was upheld on appeal by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Outcome: Jury verdict in favor of Dr. Strock in the amount of $46,001.50.
O’Shields and Whitley v. Midlands Honda
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Clients bought a 2003 Honda Civic at an auto auction. Clients later learned the Civic was "clipped" which means the front end of the vehicle was from one vehicle and the back end of the vehicle was from another vehicle. Clients also learned that the dealer had previously sold the car as a certified pre-owned Honda to a customer who later returned the vehicle when he learned it was a "clipped" vehicle.
Outcome: A Richland County jury found for the clients in the amount of $6,645.00 actual damages and $2,381,888.00 in punitive damages.
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Clients bought a 2003 Honda Civic at an auto auction. Clients later learned the Civic was "clipped" which means the front end of the vehicle was from one vehicle and the back end of the vehicle was from another vehicle. Clients also learned that the dealer had previously sold the car as a certified pre-owned Honda to a customer who later returned the vehicle when he learned it was a "clipped" vehicle.
Outcome: A Richland County jury found for the clients in the amount of $6,645.00 actual damages and $2,381,888.00 in punitive damages.
Wright v. Craft Auto Mart
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Client bought an F-150 pickup truck. He had been told it had not been wrecked. It turned out the truck had previously been totaled. The dealer failed to tell client about the prior wreck.
Outcome: The jury found for client under the SC Unfair Trade Practices Act in the amount of $25,578.00 which was trebled by the court for a total of $76,734.00. The Court awarded attorney's fees of $70,650 and costs in the amount of $4,656.59.
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Client bought an F-150 pickup truck. He had been told it had not been wrecked. It turned out the truck had previously been totaled. The dealer failed to tell client about the prior wreck.
Outcome: The jury found for client under the SC Unfair Trade Practices Act in the amount of $25,578.00 which was trebled by the court for a total of $76,734.00. The Court awarded attorney's fees of $70,650 and costs in the amount of $4,656.59.
Patrick v. Chrysler
Practice Area: Lemon Law
Description: Clients bought a Jeep that turned out to be defective. Defendant refused to buy the Jeep back under the SC Lemon Law.
Outcome: Jury found for clients. Defendant was ordered to pay $17,126.40 for the Jeep and $73,050 towards clients' attorney's fees.
Practice Area: Lemon Law
Description: Clients bought a Jeep that turned out to be defective. Defendant refused to buy the Jeep back under the SC Lemon Law.
Outcome: Jury found for clients. Defendant was ordered to pay $17,126.40 for the Jeep and $73,050 towards clients' attorney's fees.
ARBITRATIONS
Practice Area: Conversion and Unfair Trade Practices
Description: Client, single mother of two, went to a Nissan dealer to buy an Altima. Dealer had client sign its form contracts. Dealer could not sell the financing contract to another financial institution, so it yo-yoed the car. It told the client she could keep the car if she put down more money. It offered to sell her a lesser value vehicle. It then demanded the return of the Altima. Client did not agree because she signed the contracts and had received emails congratulating her on her purchase. Dealer came to her work and took the car. Dealer then refused to return client’s trade-in unless client paid the dealer over $5,000. Client refused. Client lost her job because she did not have transportation. The trade was eventually repossessed. Client was forced into arbitration. Dealer never offered to settle the case.
Outcome: The arbitrator found for client under a conversion claim (the unauthorized possession and control of another’s property) and the SC Unfair Trade Practices Act. The award included actual damages, punitive damages, costs, and attorney’s fees totaling $663,426.03.
Description: Client, single mother of two, went to a Nissan dealer to buy an Altima. Dealer had client sign its form contracts. Dealer could not sell the financing contract to another financial institution, so it yo-yoed the car. It told the client she could keep the car if she put down more money. It offered to sell her a lesser value vehicle. It then demanded the return of the Altima. Client did not agree because she signed the contracts and had received emails congratulating her on her purchase. Dealer came to her work and took the car. Dealer then refused to return client’s trade-in unless client paid the dealer over $5,000. Client refused. Client lost her job because she did not have transportation. The trade was eventually repossessed. Client was forced into arbitration. Dealer never offered to settle the case.
Outcome: The arbitrator found for client under a conversion claim (the unauthorized possession and control of another’s property) and the SC Unfair Trade Practices Act. The award included actual damages, punitive damages, costs, and attorney’s fees totaling $663,426.03.
Practice Area: Unfair Trade Practice Claim
Description: Clients bought a brand new 2014 Dodge Challenger R/T Plus 100th Anniversary Edition. Clients learned the Challenger had been damaged in transport and repaired. The dealer did not follow the SC Damage Disclosure Law. Clients were forced into arbitration.
Outcome: The arbitrator found for clients under the SC Dealers Act in the amount of $143,818.20 and awarded attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $117,416.53.
Description: Clients bought a brand new 2014 Dodge Challenger R/T Plus 100th Anniversary Edition. Clients learned the Challenger had been damaged in transport and repaired. The dealer did not follow the SC Damage Disclosure Law. Clients were forced into arbitration.
Outcome: The arbitrator found for clients under the SC Dealers Act in the amount of $143,818.20 and awarded attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $117,416.53.
Practice Area: Unfair Trade Practice
Description: Client, who was a war veteran with PTSD, bought a 2012 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4 for $24,000. He put $8,000 cash down. Client was late on his first payment, and the bank made the dealership buy the Retail Installment Sales Contract back. Client then paid two payments to catch up, but dealership demanded the return of the truck or $15,000. Client refused. Dealership took the truck and sold it at auction.
Outcome: The arbitrator found in favor of client and awarded client $336,655.63.
Description: Client, who was a war veteran with PTSD, bought a 2012 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4 for $24,000. He put $8,000 cash down. Client was late on his first payment, and the bank made the dealership buy the Retail Installment Sales Contract back. Client then paid two payments to catch up, but dealership demanded the return of the truck or $15,000. Client refused. Dealership took the truck and sold it at auction.
Outcome: The arbitrator found in favor of client and awarded client $336,655.63.
appellate court decisions
Diane R. Henderson (f/k/a Diane M. Reed) vs. Summerville Ford Mercury, Inc.
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Client bought a car for her daughter. A Dorchester County dealership sold the car without disclosing that it had been previously wrecked. Client sued in State Court. The dealership forced client into arbitration. The arbitrator found for client. The arbitrator’s award was confirmed by the trial court as a judgment against the Dealer. The Dealer appealed claiming it had paid the amount in the Order so the Order should not have been entered into the record.
Outcome: The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled in favor of client. The dealership then had to pay an additional $184,000 in attorney’s fees.
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Client bought a car for her daughter. A Dorchester County dealership sold the car without disclosing that it had been previously wrecked. Client sued in State Court. The dealership forced client into arbitration. The arbitrator found for client. The arbitrator’s award was confirmed by the trial court as a judgment against the Dealer. The Dealer appealed claiming it had paid the amount in the Order so the Order should not have been entered into the record.
Outcome: The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled in favor of client. The dealership then had to pay an additional $184,000 in attorney’s fees.
Austin v Stokes Craven Holding Company
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Dealership misrepresented prior wreck damage to a 2000 Ford F250 truck. Dealership also forged client's name on the Buyers Guide. The client simply wanted his money back, but the dealership refused. On appeal, this case established new law in South Carolina as the SC Supreme Court determined that a consumer can recover actual and punitive damages under a fraud claim and receive attorney's fees under an unfair trade practices claim.
Outcome: Jury found for Mr. Austin in the amount of $26,371.10 in actual damages and $216,600 in punitive damages. On appeal, the Supreme Court of South Carolina found that $49,936.50 in trial level fees was also warranted. After thirteen years and two appeals, the Defendant paid over $1,000,000.
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Dealership misrepresented prior wreck damage to a 2000 Ford F250 truck. Dealership also forged client's name on the Buyers Guide. The client simply wanted his money back, but the dealership refused. On appeal, this case established new law in South Carolina as the SC Supreme Court determined that a consumer can recover actual and punitive damages under a fraud claim and receive attorney's fees under an unfair trade practices claim.
Outcome: Jury found for Mr. Austin in the amount of $26,371.10 in actual damages and $216,600 in punitive damages. On appeal, the Supreme Court of South Carolina found that $49,936.50 in trial level fees was also warranted. After thirteen years and two appeals, the Defendant paid over $1,000,000.
Kucharski v Rick Hendricks
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Mr. Kucharski tried to buy a vehicle from Rick Hendrick. Rick Hendrick could not sell the retail installment sales contract. It refused to give Mr. Kucharski his trade in back even though he demanded its return. Finally, Rick Hendrick convinced Nationsbank to buy the contract after it forged another person's name on the contract. Mr. Kucharski refused to pay for the vehicle. The car was repossessed and Mr. Kucharski was left without a vehicle.
Outcome: The jury found for Mr. Kucharski in the amount of $16,500. This was trebled by the court for a verdict of $49,500. The Court of Appeals ordered Rick Hendricks to pay attorney's fees of $26,000.
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Mr. Kucharski tried to buy a vehicle from Rick Hendrick. Rick Hendrick could not sell the retail installment sales contract. It refused to give Mr. Kucharski his trade in back even though he demanded its return. Finally, Rick Hendrick convinced Nationsbank to buy the contract after it forged another person's name on the contract. Mr. Kucharski refused to pay for the vehicle. The car was repossessed and Mr. Kucharski was left without a vehicle.
Outcome: The jury found for Mr. Kucharski in the amount of $16,500. This was trebled by the court for a verdict of $49,500. The Court of Appeals ordered Rick Hendricks to pay attorney's fees of $26,000.
Sanders v Rick Hendrick Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram and others
Practice area: Fraud and Unfair Trade Practices
Description: Sanders alleged Rick Hendrick Dodge sold him a car by misrepresenting his income to Santander which bought the retail installment sales contract from Rick Hendrick. The car was repossessed because Sanders could not make the payments. Sanders sued Rick Hendrick. Rick Hendrick tried to force Sanders into arbitration based on the arbitration clause in the contract.
Outcome: The Court ruled that because Rick Hendrick sold the contract to Santander, it did not have the right to use the contract to force Sanders to arbitrate the case. The case is now heading to trial.
Practice area: Fraud and Unfair Trade Practices
Description: Sanders alleged Rick Hendrick Dodge sold him a car by misrepresenting his income to Santander which bought the retail installment sales contract from Rick Hendrick. The car was repossessed because Sanders could not make the payments. Sanders sued Rick Hendrick. Rick Hendrick tried to force Sanders into arbitration based on the arbitration clause in the contract.
Outcome: The Court ruled that because Rick Hendrick sold the contract to Santander, it did not have the right to use the contract to force Sanders to arbitrate the case. The case is now heading to trial.
settlements
Practice Area: Unfair Trade Practice Claim
Description: Client, single woman, bought a Lexus from a Nissan dealer. The Lexus had come from Pennsylvania and was 13 years old. The car’s frame had holes in the frame from rust damage. Dealer had inspected and sold it without telling client about the rust damage. The Lexus dealer claimed the car was unsafe to drive. Client was forced into arbitration.
Outcome: After a day and a half of testimony, the dealer settled the case for $250,000.00.
Description: Client, single woman, bought a Lexus from a Nissan dealer. The Lexus had come from Pennsylvania and was 13 years old. The car’s frame had holes in the frame from rust damage. Dealer had inspected and sold it without telling client about the rust damage. The Lexus dealer claimed the car was unsafe to drive. Client was forced into arbitration.
Outcome: After a day and a half of testimony, the dealer settled the case for $250,000.00.
Practice Area: Lemon Law
Description: Client bought a brand new 2011 Dodge Charger. The Charger’s paint had been damaged in transport.
Outcome: Chrysler repurchased the vehicle and was ordered to pay attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $72,154.47. The total amount of the settlement was $107,651.06.
Description: Client bought a brand new 2011 Dodge Charger. The Charger’s paint had been damaged in transport.
Outcome: Chrysler repurchased the vehicle and was ordered to pay attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $72,154.47. The total amount of the settlement was $107,651.06.
Practice Area: Lemon Law
Description: Clients bought a brand new 2012 Ford Focus that had various electrical problems, problems with Sync, and transmission and clutch issues.
Outcome: Ford paid clients $85,000, and the clients kept the vehicle.
Description: Clients bought a brand new 2012 Ford Focus that had various electrical problems, problems with Sync, and transmission and clutch issues.
Outcome: Ford paid clients $85,000, and the clients kept the vehicle.
Practice Area: Fraud
Description: Client bought a 1988 Ford Mustang from a dealership through eBay. The dealership misrepresented the Mustang when client asked if the car had any rust. Client bought car and had it transported to South Carolina. The Mustang was so rusted underneath it was unsafe to drive.
Outcome: Defendants settled the case for $180,000.00
Description: Client bought a 1988 Ford Mustang from a dealership through eBay. The dealership misrepresented the Mustang when client asked if the car had any rust. Client bought car and had it transported to South Carolina. The Mustang was so rusted underneath it was unsafe to drive.
Outcome: Defendants settled the case for $180,000.00
Practice Area: Lemon Law
Description: Client bought a brand new 2014 Chevrolet Camero. The Camero’s back wheel would come off the ground during turns, there was a grinding noise in the rear end, and the safety features on the rear view mirror occasionally stopped working.
Outcome: General Motors repurchased the vehicle and paid attorney's fees and costs. The settlement totaled over $70,000.00.
Description: Client bought a brand new 2014 Chevrolet Camero. The Camero’s back wheel would come off the ground during turns, there was a grinding noise in the rear end, and the safety features on the rear view mirror occasionally stopped working.
Outcome: General Motors repurchased the vehicle and paid attorney's fees and costs. The settlement totaled over $70,000.00.
Practice Area: Lemon Law
Description: Client bought a brand new 2015 Dodge Ram Big Horn. The truck’s back-up camera and other electrical components did not work properly.
Outcome: FCA repurchased the vehicle and paid attorney's fees and costs. The settlement totaled over $58,000.00.
Description: Client bought a brand new 2015 Dodge Ram Big Horn. The truck’s back-up camera and other electrical components did not work properly.
Outcome: FCA repurchased the vehicle and paid attorney's fees and costs. The settlement totaled over $58,000.00.