HOLLOWAY V. WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST COMPANY, N.A., 428 S.E.2d 453 (1993) CASE BRIEF

HOLLOWAY V. WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST COMPANY, N.A.

428 S.E.2d 453 (1993)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Holloway (Ps) appealed a decision that denied their motion to amend their complaint, dismissed their intentional infliction of emotional distress claims, and dismissed Ps' prayer for treble damages under Ps' action for unfair debt collection practices.

FACTS: P purchased a car financed by D. She defaulted on the loan. Jean Dawson, an employee of D, attempted to repossess the car in the parking lot outside of a Durham laundromat. At the laundromat with P were: 1) Sue Holloway, who is Hallie Holloway's mother; 2) Swanzett Holloway, who is Hallie Holloway's 10-year-old niece; and 3) Damien Holloway, who is Hallie Holloway's 4-month old son. Ps left the scene driving the car Dawson sought to repossess. Ps dues D over the incident and alleged that Dawson aimed a gun at them in her attempt to repossess the car. Ps sought recovery for assault, for intentional infliction of emotional distress, and for violations of G.S. 75-51 and G.S. 75-56. Ps Hallie Holloway and Damien Holloway sought recovery for battery arising from defendant Dawson's touching them while 'reach[ing] through the window of the car' to take the car keys from the ignition. D filed an answer with a counterclaim against Hallie (P) for the amount owed on the underlying debt ($ 1,933.74), interest, and attorney's fees. Dawson (D) denied Ps' allegations and pleaded inter alia self-defense. Hallie (P) defaulted on D's counterclaim. Ps then moved to amend their complaint to add a claim of negligent hiring and a claim of gross negligence with a prayer for punitive damages. The judge denied Ps' motion to amend. Judge Samuel T. Currin then issued an order (1) dismissing with prejudice Ps' claims for the intentional infliction of emotional distress; (2) dismissing with prejudice the assault claims of Hallie Holloway and Sue Holloway; (3) dismissing with prejudice Hallie Holloway's battery claim; (4) dismissing with prejudice the G.S. Chapter 75 claims of Sue Holloway, Swanzett Holloway, and Damien Holloway; (5) limiting any potential recovery by Hallie Holloway under her G.S. Chapter 75 claim to $ 1000, and; (6) barring treble damages and striking that part of the complaint's prayer for relief. Ps then filed another motion to amend their complaint. Judge Henry W. Hight, Jr., denied this motion. At trial, directed verdicts in favor of Ds were entered on Damien Holloway's battery claim and both Swanzett Holloway's and Damien Holloway's assault claims. As to plaintiff Hallie Holloway's G.S. Chapter 75 claim, the jury found that (1) Dawson (D) had 'commit[ted] an unfair act of debt collection' and (2) Hallie Holloway was entitled to recover $ 1,000.00. On 17 June 1991, Judge Henry V. Barnette, Jr. entered a judgment awarding Hallie Holloway a total of $ 1,000.00 on her G.S. Chapter 75 claim. However, this amount was 'offset against the Defendants' [27 December 1988 Amended Default] Judgment on the [1 July 1988] counterclaim. Ps appealed.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner