§ 19-23 Contract - Duty to Read

• Library: South Carolina Requests to Charge - Civil (SCBar) (2016 Ed.)

§ 19-23 Contract - Duty to Read

A person who signs a contract or other written document cannot avoid the effect of the document by claiming he did not read it. A person signing a document is responsible for reading the document and making sure of its contents. That is to say, every contracting party owes a duty to the other party to the contract and to the public to learn the contents of a document before he signs it. One who signs a written instrument has the duty to exercise reasonable care to protect himself. Such duty requires that he read the contract which he signs.

If the person cannot read, he has the affirmative duty to ask someone to read the document to him. Simply stated, a person who signs a contract or other written document is bound by the terms and conditions of the writing.

NOTE: This rule is subject to the exception that if the party is ignorant and unwary, his failure to read the document may be excused. Burwell v. South Carolina Nat'l Bank, 288 S.C. 34, 340 S.E.2d 786 (1986); Thomas v. American Workman, 197 S.C. 178, 14 S.E.2d 886 (1941). This exception is, however, very strictly interpreted by our Court. Id. In determining whether a party can be classified as ignorant and unwary, an individual's education, business experience and intelligence are all considered. Id.

See Citizens and Southern Nat'l Bank v. Lanford, 313 S.C. 540, 443 S.E.2d 549 (1994); Burwell v. South Carolina Nat'l Bank, 288 S.C. 34, 340 S.E.2d 786 (1986)(every contracting party owes duty to other party to contract and to public to learn contents of document before he signs it; one cannot complain of fraud and misrepresentation in contents of document if truth could have been ascertained by reading it; rule is subject to exception that if party is ignorant and unwary, his failure to read document may be excused; this exception is, however, very strictly interpreted by our court; in determining whether party can be classified as ignorant and unwary, an individual's education, business experience and intelligence are all considered); First Baptist Church of Timmonsville v. George A. Creed & Son, Inc., 276 S.C. 597, 281 S.E.2d 121 (1981)(holding that in the absence of showing of fraud, mistake,

...