apparent authority provides that the principal doctrine in South Carolina

2013See Hofer, 298 S.C. at 510 , 381 S.E.2d at 740 ("[E]ven if a partner lacks the actual authority to bind the partnership, when a partner is apparently carrying on the business of the partnership in the usual way, and the one with whom he is transacting business does not know the partner lacks actual authority, the partner's acts will bind the partnership."); Fernander v. Thigpen, 278 S.C. 140, 143 , 293 S.E.2d 424, 426 (1982) ("The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of its agent when it has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary

2013See Hofer, 298 S.C. at 510 , 381 S.E.2d at 740 ("[E]ven if a partner lacks the actual authority to bind the partnership, when a partner is apparently carrying on the business of the partnership in the usual way, and the one with whom he is transacting business does not know the partner lacks actual authority, the partner's acts will bind the partnership."); Fernander v. Thigpen, 278 S.C. 140, 143 , 293 S.E.2d 424, 426 (1982) ("The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of its agent when it has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary

2018As to whether the trial court erred in attributing the knowledge and acts of agents, including the attorney who closed the bank loans, to Church: Spence v. Spence, 368 S.C. 106, 126 , 628 S.E.2d 869, 879 (2006) ("The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of his agent when he has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary prudence, reasonably knowledgeable with business usages and customs, are led to believe the agent has certain authority and they in turn deal with the agent based on that assumption.

2018As to whether the trial court erred in attributing the knowledge and acts of agents, including the attorney who closed the bank loans, to Church: Spence v. Spence, 368 S.C. 106, 126 , 628 S.E.2d 869, 879 (2006) ("The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of his agent when he has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary prudence, reasonably knowledgeable with business usages and customs, are led to believe the agent has certain authority and they in turn deal with the agent based on that assumption.

1992“The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of its agent when it has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary prudence, reasonably knowledgeable with business usages and customs, are led to believe the agent has certain authority and they in turn deal with the agent based on that assumption.” Chambers of South Carolina, Inc. v. Entrepreneur, Inc., 292 S.C. 97, 100 , 354 S.E. (2d) 921, 923 (Ct. App. 1987).

1992“The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of its agent when it has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary prudence, reasonably knowledgeable with business usages and customs, are led to believe the agent has certain authority and they in turn deal with the agent based on that assumption.” Chambers of South Carolina, Inc. v. Entrepreneur, Inc., 292 S.C. 97, 100 , 354 S.E. (2d) 921, 923 (Ct. App. 1987).

2018A principal may be held liable to a third person in a civil lawsuit for the fraud, deceit, concealment, misrepresentation, negligence, and other omissions of duty of his agent which occur in the scope of the agent's employment, even when the principal did not authorize, participate in, or know of such misconduct or even when the principal forbade or disapproved of the act in question." (citations omitted)); Koutsogiannis v. BB&T, 365 S.C. 145, 149 , 616 S.E.2d 425, 428 (2005) ("In the attorney-client relationship, clients are generally bound by their attorneys' acts or omissions during the cou

2018A principal may be held liable to a third person in a civil lawsuit for the fraud, deceit, concealment, misrepresentation, negligence, and other omissions of duty of his agent which occur in the scope of the agent's employment, even when the principal did not authorize, participate in, or know of such misconduct or even when the principal forbade or disapproved of the act in question." (citations omitted)); Koutsogiannis v. BB&T, 365 S.C. 145, 149 , 616 S.E.2d 425, 428 (2005) ("In the attorney-client relationship, clients are generally bound by their attorneys' acts or omissions during the cou

2013See Hofer, 298 S.C. at 510 , 381 S.E.2d at 740 ("[E]ven if a partner lacks the actual authority to bind the partnership, when a partner is apparently carrying on the business of the partnership in the usual way, and the one with whom he is transacting business does not know the partner lacks actual authority, the partner's acts will bind the partnership."); Fernander v. Thigpen, 278 S.C. 140, 143 , 293 S.E.2d 424, 426 (1982) ("The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of its agent when it has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary

2013See Hofer, 298 S.C. at 510 , 381 S.E.2d at 740 ("[E]ven if a partner lacks the actual authority to bind the partnership, when a partner is apparently carrying on the business of the partnership in the usual way, and the one with whom he is transacting business does not know the partner lacks actual authority, the partner's acts will bind the partnership."); Fernander v. Thigpen, 278 S.C. 140, 143 , 293 S.E.2d 424, 426 (1982) ("The doctrine of apparent authority provides that the principal is bound by the acts of its agent when it has placed the agent in such a position that persons of ordinary

2013Auth., 343 S.C. 424 , 432, 540 S.E.2d 113 , 118 (Ct. App. 2000) ("[T]he concept of apparent authority depends upon manifestations by the principal to a third party and the reasonable belief by the third party that the agent is authorized to bind the principal.").

2013Auth., 343 S.C. 424 , 432, 540 S.E.2d 113 , 118 (Ct. App. 2000) ("[T]he concept of apparent authority depends upon manifestations by the principal to a third party and the reasonable belief by the third party that the agent is authorized to bind the principal.").

2006Fernander v. Thigpen, 278 S.C. 140, 143 , 293 S.E.2d 424, 426 (1982); Frasier v. Palmetto Homes of Florence, Inc., 323 S.C. 240, 244 , 473 S.E.2d 865, 868-69 (Ct.App.1996).

2006Fernander v. Thigpen, 278 S.C. 140, 143 , 293 S.E.2d 424, 426 (1982); Frasier v. Palmetto Homes of Florence, Inc., 323 S.C. 240, 244 , 473 S.E.2d 865, 868-69 (Ct.App.1996).