Mason v. Mason

770 S.E.2d 405 (2015)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Mason v. Mason

South Carolina Court of Appeals
770 S.E.2d 405 (2015)

Facts

The Mason Holding Company, Inc. (company) (defendant) was a closely held corporation that owned several tire stores. The company was owned by Joseph Mason Sr., his wife, Catherine Mason, their daughter, Kathy St. Blanchard (collectively, the Masons) (defendants), and their son, Joseph Mason Jr. (plaintiff). As of 2007, Joseph Jr. and Kathy each owned 30 percent of the company’s stock. Joseph Jr. was the company’s president as of 2001. In September, Wayne Byrd, Joseph Jr.’s attorney, demanded that the company stop paying for the shareholders’ personal expenses. The Masons responded by agreeing to reimburse the company for personal expenses, but Joseph Jr. refused to do so. In October, the shareholders elected Joseph Sr. as president and Joseph Jr. as vice president. Joseph Jr.’s salary and benefits were unchanged, as were most of his duties. In August, a month after stopping working for the company, Joseph Jr. sued the Masons and the company. Joseph Jr. sought, among other things, to have the company purchase his shares pursuant to South Carolina’s statutory provisions regarding the dissolution of closely held corporations. The Masons and the company asserted counterclaims against Joseph Jr. concerning a so-called casing scheme, by which Joseph Jr. exchanged fake tire receipts for company cash. The parties consented to a trial by a special referee. At trial, the Masons and the company presented evidence regarding the casing scheme, to which Joseph Jr. admitted. Joseph Jr. also admitted that he was not fired or told not to return to work and that his salary was not cut, but that he stopped working for the company because he was unhappy there, believed the Masons wanted him to quit, and was embarrassed by the Masons in front of other employees. The special referee ruled for the Masons and the company in all respects. Joseph Jr. appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Konduros, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership