Court Opinion

ID: 9585243
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:58:13.107529+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:36:50.922465
License: Public Domain

Lewis, Chief Justice:
The question certified in this case by the United States District Court seeks a decision as to the prospective application of the private enforcement provision of Section 38-37-940(2).
We held in G-H Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Travelers Insurance Company, 270 S. C. 147, 241 S. E. (2d) 534, that a private cause of action existed under Section 38-37-940(2) for the wrongful termination of an agency agreement. Subsequently, that holding was impinged upon only to the extent that its retroactive application was held to unconstitutionally violate the contract clause, (Garris v. Hanover Insurance Company, 630 F. (2d) 1001; G-H Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Continental Insurance Company, 278 S. C. 241, 294 S. E. (2d) 336), clearly leaving G-H Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Travelers Ins. Co., supra, as authority for the prospective application of the private enforcement provision of Section 38-37-940(2).
*454G-H Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Travelers Insurance Companies, supra, has not been modified by any decision of this Court and is the law of this jurisdiction. Therefore, the answer to the certified question is: Dixon does, under South Carolina Code Ann. Section 38-37-940(2) (1976), have a private cause of action for termination of his agency agreement executed December 15,1980 and effective January 1,1981.
Gregory and Harwell, JJ., concur.