Case Note:   Huggins v Citibank NA et al, [2003] Opinion No. 25691 (11 August 2003) (South Carolina Supreme Court)

The Supreme Court of the State of South Carolina has denied a claim of negligence against a credit card company that issued a card to an impostor.   In its August 11, 2003 decision in Huggins v Citibank NA et al, the Court held that the State of Carolina does not recognize the tort of negligent enablement of impostor fraud.   Specifically, the Court declined to recognize a legal duty of care between credit card issuers and those individuals whose identities may be stolen.   The Court had little difficulty finding that it was foreseeable that injury could arise by the negligent issuance of a credit card.   Rather, it was the question whether there existed a duty of care on which the claim failed.   The Court agreed with the New York appellate court decision in Polzer v TRW Inc, 682 NYS 2d 194 (NY App Div 1998), that a relationship, if any, between credit card issuers and potential victims of identity theft is far too tenuous to rise to the level of a duty of care between them.   Significantly, the Court noted in its reasons for judgment that neither the plaintiff nor the impostor who stole his credit card information was a customer of the Bank. In the final analysis, the Court was reluctant to create a duty of care, noting that a range of state and national legislation provides at least some remedy for victims of credit card fraud.   While this legislation may not fully compensate victims of identity theft for all their injury, the Court was of the view that this was a matter better addressed in the legislative arena than in the courts. For the full reasons for judgment, see: http://www.sclawyersweekly.com/archives/sc/opin/sup/25691.htm. Summary by:   Tina Nanov