Preview:

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure.

NO. COA02-1684 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: D.M. FAIRCLOTH, Plaintiff, v. SCOTT HOWELL & CO., INC., Defendant. Appeal by defendant from Order entered 24 September 2002 by Judge Gary E. Trawick in Superior Court, Sampson County. the Court of Appeals 7 October 2003. Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, L.L.P., by Scott A. Miskimon and Timothy W. Howard, attorneys for plaintiff-appellee. Penry Riemann, P.L.L.C., by J. Anthony Penry and Cynthia A. O'Neal, attorneys for defendant-appellant. WYNN, Judge. The issue on appeal is whether the statute of limitations barred Scott Howell & Co., Inc.'s claim for consulting fee debts arising from Senator D. M. Faircloth's unsuccessful re-election bid for the United States Senate in 1998. We answer, yes; accordingly, we uphold the trial court's judgment. The record on appeal shows that an unincorporated association called "Faircloth for Senate Committee 1998" ("the Faircloth Heard in Sampson County No. 02 CVS 612 16 December 2003

Committee") retained Scott Howell & Co., a Texas advertising

-2agency, to provide political consulting services. After the

election of 1998, Scott Howell & Co. sought payment for services rendered to the campaign from the Faircloth Committee. According

to Scott Howell & Co., the Faircloth Committee assured payment; however, the company did not submit an invoice for payment until 1 April 2001. Shortly thereafter, the company through its attorney,

sent a letter to Senator Faircloth claiming that he was personally liable for the debt, demanding payment, and threatening to sue to recover the consulting fees. In response, Senator Faircloth brought a declaratory judgment action to determine whether he was personally liable for the campaign debt, and asserting the statute of limitations. Scott

Howell & Co. answered and counterclaimed for damages from breach of contract and quantum meruit. From the trial court's grant of

summary judgment in favor of Senator Faircloth, Scott Howell & Co. appeals contending that an issue of fact existed as to whether Senator Faircloth should have been estopped from pleading the statute of limitations as a defense. We disagree.

Under N.C. Gen. Stat.

Download 02-1684-5.pdf

South Carolina Law