Hotz v. Minyard,

403 S.E.2d 634 (1991)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Daddy owned two auto dealerships. Daddy got Dobson, a lawyer, to do legal work for the family. On October 24, 1984, Daddy went to Dobson's law office with his wife, secretary, and his son Tommy (R) to sign a will which left R the Greenville dealership and gave other family members bequests and divided the remainder of the estate equally between R and Judy (P), R's sister, in trust after the death of their mother. All present got copies of the will. Daddy returned later that day and signed a second will containing the same provisions as the first except that is gave the real estate upon which the Greenville dealership was located to R outright. Daddy instructed Dobson not to disclose the existence of the second will. Daddy specifically directed that P not be told about it. A year later P called Dobson to get a copy of the will and at Daddy's request was only shown the first will. P questioned why she did not have the Anderson dealership given to her and Dobson lied to her and led her to believe that notes that Dobson had made on the will were part of her father's will. Dobson never told P that the will was revoked. Daddy got sick, and P took care of Daddy while R ran the Anderson dealership. R made a series of expansion moves that P did not like and eventually P was terminated from the payroll of the Anderson dealership and dropped from Daddy's will. P was then told that if she dropped plans for a lawsuit, she rehired and put back in Daddy's will. P discharged her attorneys under the mistaken impression that she would inherit the Anderson Dealership and get half of Daddy's estate. Eventually, P was fired from her position. P sued R and Dobson. The trial court granted summary judgment on several causes of action. This opinion addresses only the issues against Dobson for breach of duty.