STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

) CASE NO. 2022-CP-03-______

COUNTY OF ALLENDALE )
)
ARTHUR BADGER, individually and as )
Second Successor Personal Representative )
of the ESTATE OF DONNA BADGER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) SUMMONS
) (Jury Trial Demanded)
RUSSELL LUCIUS LAFFITTE, ) (Civil Conspiracy/Conversion/Fraud)
PALMETTO STATE BANK, and )
RICHARD ALEXANDER MURDAUGH, )
)
Defendants. )
____________________________________)

TO THE DEFENDANTS ABOVE NAMED:

YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMOND AND REQUIRED to answer the Complaint herein,

a copy of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer to said Complaint

on the subscriber at his office at 265 Barnwell Highway, Allendale, South Carolina, within thirty

(30) days after service hereof, exclusive of the day of such service; and if you fail to answer the

Complaint within the time aforesaid; the Plaintiff in this action will apply to the Court for the relief

demanded in the Complaint and judgment by default will be entered against you for relief

demanded in the Complaint.

GOODING AND GOODING, P.A.

s/Mark B. Tinsley______________
Mark B. Tinsley (SC Bar #15597)
P. O. Box 1000
Allendale, SC 29810
803-587-7676
mark@goodingandgooding.com

June 2, 2022 Attorney for Plaintiffs

Page 1 of 27
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) CASE NO. 2022-CP-03-______
COUNTY OF ALLENDALE )
)
ARTHUR BADGER, individually and as )
Second Successor Personal Representative )
of the ESTATE OF DONNA BADGER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) COMPLAINT
) (Jury Trial Demanded)
RUSSELL LUCIUS LAFFITTE, ) (Civil Conspiracy/Conversion/Fraud)
PALMETTO STATE BANK, and )
RICHARD ALEXANDER MURDAUGH, )
)
Defendants. )
____________________________________)

The Plaintiff would respectfully show:

1. Plaintiff Arthur Badger (hereinafter “Arthur Badger”) is, and was at all times

relevant herein, a citizen and resident of Allendale County, South Carolina. Moreover, by Order

of the Allendale County Probate Court dated May 18, 2022, Arthur Badger was appointed second

successor personal representative of the Estate of Donna Badger, the Estate having been re-opened

by Order of the Allendale County Probate Court also dated May 18, 2022. At the time of her

death, Donna Badger, the decedent, was a citizen and resident of Allendale County, South

Carolina.

2. Defendant Russell Laffitte (hereinafter Defendant Laffitte) is, and was at all times

relevant herein, a citizen and resident of Hampton County, South Carolina, who applied in

Allendale County to serve as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Donna Badger.

3. Defendant Palmetto State Bank (hereinafter Defendant Bank) is a corporation

organized and existing under the laws of the State of South Carolina. At all times relevant herein,

Defendant Bank owned and operated a bank branch in Allendale County, South Carolina.

Page 2 of 27
 4. Defendant Alexander Murdaugh (hereinafter Defendant Murdaugh) is, and was at

all times relevant herein, a citizen and resident of Hampton County, South Carolina. Defendant

Murdaugh is currently incarcerated in Richland County, South Carolina, awaiting trial on a number

of indictments, including indictments arising from the facts alleged herein. Moreover, at all

relevant times herein, Defendant Murdaugh was an attorney licensed to practice law in the State

of South Carolina, who undertook the representation of the Plaintiffs herein. As the legal

representative of the Plaintiffs, Defendant Murdaugh owned them professional duties of honesty,

competence, diligence, communication, safekeeping, supervision, deference, loyalty and the duty

not to commit crimes against them, as outlined in the affidavit of merit of Michael J. Virzi filed

contemporaneously herewith and incorporated by reference herein.

5. The most substantial part of the acts or omissions giving rise to the causes of action

set forth herein occurred in Allendale County, South Carolina, making venue proper in Allendale

County. Moreover, as described in greater detail below, Defendant Laffitte’s acts of filing

documents, including false and fraudulent documents, with the Allendale County Probate Court

and the Allendale County Court of Common Pleas are deemed to have occurred in Allendale

County thereby making venue proper in Allendale County under South Carolina law.

6. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Laffitte was an agent, servant and/or

employee of Defendant Bank and was acting within the scope and course of his agency, service

and/or employment thereby making Defendant Bank responsible for the acts or omissions of

Defendant Laffitte under the theory of respondeat superior. Moreover, at all times relevant herein,

Defendant Bank knew of Defendant Laffitte’s acts and omissions set forth herein, ratified all of

his acts and omissions, and adopted them as its own.

Page 3 of 27
 7. On or about January 28, 2011, Arthur Badger and Donna Badger, along with other

individuals, were involved in an automobile wreck caused by a UPS truck. As a result of the acts

and omissions of UPS and its driver, Arthur and Donna Badger both sustained personal injuries,

and Donna Badger met her untimely death.

8. At the time of her death, Donna Badger was married to Arthur Badger, and they

had six children. Donna Badger died intestate, thereby leaving Arthur and her six children as the

intestate heirs and statutory beneficiaries of her estate pursuant to South Carolina statutory law.

9. Shortly after the wreck, Arthur Badger retained the services of Defendant

Murdaugh to represent him in pursuing claims against UPS on behalf of Arthur Badger

individually for damages he sustained as a result of his own personal injuries as well as on behalf

of his wife’s estate for damages sustained by her intestate heirs and statutory beneficiaries as a

result of her personal injuries and untimely death.

10. Because the claims arising out of the injuries and death of Arthur Badger’s wife

consisted of a survival claim and a wrongful death claim, a personal representative was required

to prosecute the claims on behalf of the Estate of Donna Badger and the statutory beneficiaries of

Donna Badger in accordance with South Carolina statutory law.

11. The selection and appointment of a personal representative for such purposes is

likewise a function of South Carolina statutory right.

12. In accordance with S.C. Code § 62-3-203, Arthur Badger had statutory priority to

serve as the personal representative of Donna Badger’s estate.

13. On February 9, 2011, at the direction of and with the assistance of Defendant

Murdaugh, Arthur Badger was appointed personal representative of his wife’s estate by order of

the Allendale County Probate Court in case number 2011-ES-03-00011.

Page 4 of 27
 14. On that same date, Defendant Murdaugh filed civil action number 2011-CP-03-

00039, captioned “Arthur Badger, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Donna Badger, v.

United Parcel Services, Inc. and Matthew Fields,” asserting both wrongful death and survival

actions against UPS on behalf of the Estate of Donna Badger. Defendant Murdaugh also filed civil

action number 2011-CP-03-00043, captioned “Arthur Badger v. United Parcel Service, Inc. and

Matthew Fields,” asserting the individual personal injury claims of Arthur Badger against UPS.

15. From February 9, 2011, until September 14, 2012, Arthur Badger faithfully served

as the Personal Representative of his wife’s estate fulfilling all the duties and responsibilities of

that position.

16. The above-referenced civil actions were scheduled for mediation on or about

September 6, 2012. Prior to that date, the Defendants joined together and devised a scheme to

steal money from Arthur Badger and the Estate. Shortly before the mediation, despite the fact that

Arthur Badger was the duly appointed personal representative, fulfilling all of his duties as the

personal representative and filing all required documents, and despite the fact that Arthur Badger

had statutory priority to serve as personal representative, the Defendants fraudulently deceived

Arthur Badger into unknowingly signing a Statement of Resignation, effectively resigning his

position as personal representative of his wife’s estate, in order to hide the details of their scheme

and any settlement from Arthur Badger, thereby carrying out the details of their scheme to steal

money.

17. Immediately after acquiescing in the scheme, on or about August 30, 2012, and just

days before the upcoming mediation, in order to take control of the lawsuit and to facilitate, aid

and abet Defendant Murdaugh in the theft and conversion of client funds, Defendant Laffitte with

the express permission of Defendant Bank used his title, position and affiliation with the Bank in

Page 5 of 27
order to sign and file an application in the Allendale County Probate Court petitioning to become

the successor personal representative of the Estate; this was done through deceit and fraud, despite

the fact Arthur Badger or other family members had priority under the applicable statute to serve

as personal representative. Moreover, the Defendants listed Defendant Bank’s address and

telephone number as well as Defendant Laffitte’s position with Defendant Bank in order to secure

the appointment as successor personal representative. Naming Defendant Laffitte as the personal

representative and excluding Arthur Badger and/or other family members of Donna Badger from

important facts concerning the claims allowed only the Defendants to have any knowledge

regarding the true facts of the handling of the claims as well as any petition to the court for approval

of settlements and/or notice of any hearings to approve settlements. Through these deceptive,

clandestine acts, Defendants were able to carry out their conspiracy to steal and were able to keep

their theft and fraud hidden from Arthur Badger and the beneficiaries of the Estate of Donna

Badger.

18. Moreover, unbeknownst to Arthur Badger, at that time, the Defendants were

engaged in an ongoing criminal conspiracy involving, among other things, illegal loans and theft

of money from other clients of Defendant Murdaugh. Further, Defendants Laffitte and the Bank

assisted, aided, abetted, enabled, misrepresented facts to governmental agencies, and did other

things in order to help Defendant Murdaugh perpetuate their scheme of fraud and theft in order to

attempt to recoup potential bad loans that had been made to Defendant Murdaugh as reflected in

internal Palmetto State Bank Documents.

19. Defendant Bank approved of Defendant Laffitte’s role as personal representative

and Defendant Laffitte acted at all times as an agent and representative of Defendant Bank.

Moreover, upon information and belief, this relationship between the Defendants had been in place

Page 6 of 27
for other legal matters and was the Bank’s attempt at helping Defendant Murdaugh become solvent

thereby protecting its own bad investments.

20. By order of the Allendale County Probate Court dated September 14, 2012,

Defendant Laffitte was appointed successor personal representative of the Estate of Donna Badger,

thereby assuming liability for all transactions, acts and omissions occurring in the handling of the

Estate. Defendant Laffitte also signed a statement of qualification and acceptance of the

appointment as personal representative of the estate and agreed to perform the duties and discharge

the trust of that position as an officer of the court and as a representative of Defendant Bank.

21. At no time before or since Defendant Laffitte’s appointment has he or Defendant

Murdaugh had any discussion with Arthur Badger about Defendant Laffitte’s appointment, the

Estate, the details of the lawsuit, the actual facts concerning the settlement of the claims of the

Estate, Arthur Badger’s alleged waiver or renunciation of any of his rights to receive proceeds

from the Estate’s claims, nor anything else related to Defendant Laffitte’s handling of the Estate’s

claims or the Defendants’ fraudulent scheme.

22. At some point prior to September 13, 2021, unbeknownst to Arthur Badger and

without any consultation or communication with Arthur Badger, Defendants settled Arthur

Badger’s individual claim as well as the claims of the Estate. Neither Arthur Badger nor any other

intestate heir or statutory beneficiary was told or knew the actual facts concerning any settlement

offer, negotiations or participated in the settlement negotiations, signed any true settlement

agreements, or were told the extent of the monies recovered for them.

23. Arthur Badger, as the surviving spouse of Donna Badger who died intestate, was

entitled to receive half of the settlement proceeds of both the Estate’s survival action and the

Page 7 of 27
wrongful death action. Further, at no time did Arthur Bader waive, disclaim or renounce his right

to receive from his wife’s Estate.

24. By statute, wrongful death and survival claims require court approval. Therefore,

on or about October 30, 2012, Defendant Laffitte, as Personal Representative of the Estate of

Donna Badger, filed a verified petition in the Allendale County Court of Common Pleas to approve

the settlement of the survival and wrongful death claims. In the verified petition, in order to steal

settlement funds from Arthur Badger and the Estate and despite Arthur Badger having not waived

or renounced his rights as an intestate heir and statutory beneficiary, Defendant Laffitte, as

personal representative of the estate, swore under oath that Arthur Badger had “specifically

renounced his right as a statutory beneficiary” and asked the Allendale County Court of Common

Pleas to approve the settlement of the Estate’s wrongful death and survival claims. A copy of the

petition is incorporated by reference herein. The settlement hearing was held that same day

although neither Arthur Badger nor any other statutory beneficiary or intestate heir was notified or

invited to attend.

25. On the morning of November 19, 2012, Defendant Murdaugh went to the

Defendant Bank’s office where he met with Defendant Laffitte and other Bank officials to finalize

their plans to carry out the theft of the Badger money. The Badger settlements were “disbursed”

the afternoon of November 19, 2012.

26. Of the total settlement in favor of the Estate, Defendants allocated only $500 of the

total settlement to Donna Badger’s survival claim which is therefore the only portion of the

settlement that went through Donna Badger’s Estate. There were no creditor’s claims against the

Estate and no valid justification for this allocation made by the Defendants.

Page 8 of 27
 27. The remainder of the settlement amount was allocated to wrongful death. Pursuant

to South Carolina law, the wrongful death settlement was a direct claim of Arthur Badger and the

children of Donna Badger, with Arthur Badger having a one-half interest, to compensate them for

the grief, sorrow and mourning associated with the loss of Donna Badger. These wrongful death

proceeds did not pass through the Estate of Donna Badger. Rather, these funds required no further

supervision of the probate court and should have been immediately disbursed to the statutory

beneficiaries. Instead, Defendants stole or attempted to steal Arthur Badger’s interest thereby

depriving him of the same.

28. Contrary to the false, sworn statement that Arthur Badger had renounced his right

as a statutory beneficiary given by Defendant Laffitte in the verified petition to approve the

settlement of the claims of the Estate of Donna Badger, Arthur Badger had not waived his right of

inheritance as a statutory beneficiary or intestate heir. This false statement is demonstrated by the

fact that on December 20, 2012, Defendant Laffitte signed and filed the Proposal for Distribution

in the probate court indicating that Arthur Badger was an intestate heir and statutory beneficiary

entitled to 50% of his wife’s estate, shown here:

(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR INSERTION OF

PROPOSAL FOR DISTRIBUTION ON FOLLOWING PAGE)

Page 9 of 27
Page 10 of 27
The letter of transmission of the Final Accounting to the probate court also indicates that it contains

“Receipts and Releases from all 7 heirs” which too recognizes Arthur’s status as a beneficiary, as

shown here in the Receipt and Release for Arthur Badger:

Page 11 of 27
Arthur Badger was tricked into signing the Receipts and Releases by the Defendants to steal his

money, which in any event lacked any consideration and are otherwise illegal. Further, contrary

to the false sworn statement made by Defendant Laffitte, a disbursement sheet dated January 27,

2014, prepared by Defendant Murdaugh’s law firm includes Arthur Badger as a beneficiary of

Donna Badger and shows Arthur Badger was entitled to receive one-half of an undisbursed amount

of $18,018.50 because he was in fact a beneficiary of the Estate of Donna Badger. The

disbursement sheet is incorporated by reference as follows:

(THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR INSERTION OF

DISBURSMENT SHEET ON FOLLOWING PAGE)

Page 12 of 27
 29. To the extent the Receipt and Release referenced above signed by Arthur Badger

constitutes a release, Defendants fraudulently induced him to sign and fraudulently procured its

execution, all in an effort and in accordance with their plan to conceal their theft.

Page 13 of 27
 30. Additionally, at some point prior to October 30, 2012, unbeknownst to Arthur

Badger, Defendant Murdaugh settled Arthur’s individual claim. Unfortunately, Defendants

Laffitte and Bank assisted Defendant Murdaugh in stealing the majority of Arthur Badger’s

settlement. To accomplish this theft, Defendant Murdaugh had Arthur Badger sign a fraudulent

two page disbursement statement on November 19, 2012, which contained the financial

information on the first page and the second page containing only the signature line that Defendant

Murdaugh later replaced the first page to conceal the true facts from Arthur Badger. The fake,

substituted page of the fraudulent disbursement statement shows a payment to Defendant Bank as

a “Payment to fund structure per client request.” However, at no time did Arthur Badger authorize

this payment or request any type of structured settlement to be funded on his behalf, nor did he

request that any of his settlement be paid to the Defendant Bank. Rather, this was an attempt by

Defendants to conceal and coverup their theft of Arthur Badger’s funds.

31. Moreover, Defendants Murdaugh and Laffitte authorized or paid a number of

fraudulent fees and costs including but not limited to fake costs, improper attorneys’ fees,

payments for fraudulent loans and interest to be paid from Arthur Badger’s individual claim as

well as the wrongful death and survival proceeds in order to steal additional funds from Arthur

Badger and the intestate heirs and statutory beneficiaries of the Estate, including but not limited to

Arthur Badger.

32. Further, Defendant Laffitte fraudulently and unlawfully took a fee of $35,000

from the Estate’s settlement proceeds, even though only $500 was allocated to the survival claims

which capped his allowable administrative fee at $25 by statute. Additionally, Defendant Laffitte

also took and received a fraudulent and unlawful “fee” from Arthur Badger’s personal claim, also

of $35,000.00.

Page 14 of 27
 33. Because Defendants stole or assisted in stealing the settlement funds, as well as

stealing the fraudulent costs, the attorney fees paid to Defendant Murdaugh out of the settlements

and authorized by Defendant Laffitte were inappropriate and must be disgorged or otherwise

repaid by the Defendants.

34. The payment to Defendant Bank reflected on the fraudulent disbursement statement

for Arthur Badger’s settlement was drawn on the PMPED trust account held, managed and

administered by Defendant Bank for the benefit of its trust account clients including Plaintiff, by

check number 43162 dated November 19, 2012. However, after PMPED issued the check payable

to Defendant Bank from its trust account and referencing Arthur Badger, the Defendants

fraudulently reported to PMPED that check had been lost and requested PMPED to sign forms

indicating the same. Based on this false representation, the check was reversed or otherwise voided

and rewritten, again from the PMPED trust account. Thereafter, on February 6, 2013, at 2:50 p.m.,

after talking it over with at least Defendant Laffitte, Defendant Murdaugh sent Defendant Laffitte

the following email requesting that Defendant Laffitte send a fake or fraudulent email asking that

the check and Arthur Badger’s funds in the trust account be re-issued in several individual

payments:

Page 15 of 27
 35. Later that same day at 4:15 p.m., Defendant Laffitte, as requested by Defendant

Murdaugh, and in furtherance of the plan to steal Arthur Badger’s settlement funds and so as to

not cause questions with PMPED and otherwise hide this fraud from PMPED, emailed Defendant

Murdaugh the following:

This email was created at the Palmetto State Bank and sent solely for the purposes of stealing

Arthur Badger’s money and concealing that fact from PMPED. Further, Defendant Laffitte’s

reference to “the Jeanne” was deliberate and intentional illustrating his knowledge and

participation in the scheme.

36. On Friday, February 8, 2013, Defendant Murdaugh forwarded Defendant Laffitte’s

email to Jeanne Seckinger, Defendant Murdaugh’s accounting employee to request the fake checks

through which they would steal Arthur Badger’s money as follows:

Page 16 of 27
 37. As requested by Defendants Laffitte and Murdaugh, PMPED then re-issued check

number 43162 in four separate checks payable from the trust account, all payable to Palmetto State

Bank (Defendant Bank). The following checks were drawn on PMPED’s trust account for Arthur

Badger, and were used by Defendants Murdaugh and Laffitte to carry out their theft of Arthur

Badger’s settlement proceeds:

Page 17 of 27
 38. Additionally, as evidence of Defendant Laffitte’s knowledge and participation in

the scheme to divert Arthur Badger’s funds, by paying the funds to Defendant Bank under the

guise of a structured settlement with the actual purpose of laundering the funds back out to

Defendant Murdaugh and paying down indebtedness to Defendant Bank, Defendant Laffitte was

paid an additional sum of $35,000 out of Arthur Badger’s individual personal injury claim, despite

Laffitte’s actual knowledge that he was not “owed” anything from Arthur Badger or for serving as

Personal Representative of Donna Badger’s Estate.

39. Further, because Defendants stole funds from Arthur Badger’s individual personal

injury claim, the attorney fee paid to Defendant Murdaugh from the settlement proceeds must be

disgorged or otherwise recovered.

FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

(Civil Conspiracy)
40. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations contained above as fully and completely as if

repeated verbatim herein.

41. Defendants conspired and joined together in combination and agreement to

orchestrate a plan to steal and convert funds to benefit themselves and for their own use from the

wrongful death and survival settlements of the Estate of Donna Badger as well as from the personal

injury settlement of Arthur Badger.

42. In furtherance of their agreement to steal and convert funds from Arthur Badger

individually as well as from the Estate and the statutory beneficiaries and intestate heirs of Donna

Badger, Defendants engaged in overt acts including but not limited to tricking Arthur Badger into

signing documents that effectively resigned his position as personal representative to strip him of

the right of overseeing the claims being pursued on behalf of the Estate; representing to the

Allendale County Court of Common Pleas in the petition to approve settlement that Arthur Badger

Page 19 of 27
had renounced his right to receive any portion of the Estate’s claims; lying to the Court having

Arthur Badger sign a two-page disbursement sheet that misrepresented the total amount of

settlement and then substituting the front-page to cover up their theft; staging a need for check

number 43162 to be re-cut into four separate checks; laundering funds through Defendant Bank’s

daily cash account in order to unlawfully return the funds to Defendant Murdaugh, concealing

banking violations, issuing bearer instruments from client trust accounts, ignoring banking audits,

suspicious activity reports and other warnings.

43. As a direct and proximate result of this conspiracy between the Defendants,

Plaintiff, in his individual capacity and as personal representative of the Estate of Donna Badger,

has suffered great monetary damages, including but not limited to the amounts that were stolen

from Plaintiff and diverted for the personal use of Defendants, as well as emotional distress and

mental anxiety. Plaintiff is also entitled to recover the attorney’s fees paid to Defendant Murdaugh

as damages. Moreover, Plaintiff is entitled to interest as well as punitive damages as a result of

Defendants’ wrongful acts.

FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

(Conversion)
44. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations contained above as fully and completely as if

repeated verbatim herein.

45. Plaintiff, in his individual capacity, had an interest in and was the rightful owner of

the proceeds of his individual personal injury settlement, including the sum that was unlawfully

stolen by Defendants and laundered through Defendant Bank, the sum of $35,000 that was

unlawfully paid to Defendant Laffitte from Plaintiff’s individual settlement proceeds, as well as

any costs that were fraudulently reimbursed to Defendant Murdaugh. Moreover, Plaintiff, in his

Page 20 of 27
individual capacity, had an interest in and was the rightful owner of one-half of the net proceeds

of the settlements in favor of the Estate

46. Defendants converted the funds described above to their own use without the

permission of Plaintiff or any other statutory beneficiary or intestate heir of the Estate.

47. As a result of Defendants’ unauthorized assumption and exercise of ownership

rights over Plaintiffs’ funds to the exclusion of Plaintiff, Plaintiff is entitled to actual damages in

the amount of the converted funds. Further, under principles of disgorgement, Plaintiff is entitled

to recover all attorney’s fees paid to Defendant Murdaugh out of the settlements described above.

Moreover, Plaintiff is entitled to interest as well as punitive damages based on the intentional,

fraudulent and criminal conduct of Defendants.

FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Aiding and Abetting Conversion against Defendant Laffitte and Defendant Bank)

48. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations contained above as fully and completely as if

repeated verbatim herein.

49. Defendants Laffitte and Bank knew that Defendant Murdaugh was actively stealing

funds from Arthur Badger and the Estate and aided and abetted Defendant Murdaugh by

laundering the stolen funds through Defendant Bank’s daily cash account and diverting them for

the personal use of Defendant Murdaugh. Defendants Laffitte and Bank engaged in this

clandestine aiding and abetting for the purpose of earning a fee, the acceptance of which amounted

to theft and conversion in itself.

50. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ fraudulent acts, Plaintiff has

suffered great monetary damage and is entitled to actual damages and punitive damages. Further,

under principles of disgorgement, Plaintiff is entitled to recover all attorney’s fees paid to

Defendant Murdaugh out of all settlements discussed above. Plaintiff is also entitled to interest.

Page 21 of 27
 FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Common Law Fraud against Defendant Murdaugh)

51. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations contained above as fully and completely as if

repeated verbatim herein.

52. Defendant Murdaugh represented to Arthur Badger that it was in his best interest,

as well as the Estate’s best interest, for Defendant Laffitte to replace him as the personal

representative of his wife’s Estate. Defendant Murdaugh also represented to Arthur Badger that

his own personal injury claim was being settled for an amount much less than the actual settlement

amount. Further, Defendant Murdaugh represented that the costs and fees deducted from his

settlement were lawful and legitimate.

53. Each of these representations was false and material.

54. Defendant Murdaugh knew of their falsity and intended that Arthur Badger would

act upon and rely on his false representations.

55. Arthur Badger was ignorant of the falsity of Defendant Murdaugh’s representations

and had a right to rely on them, especially in light of the fact that Defendant Murdaugh was Arthur

Badger’s attorney.

56. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Murdaugh’s fraudulent acts, Plaintiff

has suffered great monetary damage and is entitled to actual damages and punitive damages.

Further, under principles of disgorgement, Plaintiff is entitled to recover all attorney’s fees paid to

Defendant Murdaugh out of all settlements discussed above.

FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Aiding and Abetting Common Law Fraud against
Defendant Laffitte and Defendant Bank)

57. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations contained above as fully and completely as if

repeated verbatim herein.

Page 22 of 27
 58. Defendants Laffitte and Bank knew the falsity of the material representations made

by Defendant Murdaugh to Arthur Badger and aided and abetted Defendant Murdaugh in carrying

out the fraud in a number of ways, including but not limited to: petitioning the court to become

successor personal representative; representing to the Court through a settlement petition that

Arthur Badger had waived or disclaimed his right to receive any portion of the Estate’s settlement

proceeds; laundering the funds that Defendant Murdaugh stole from Arthur Badger’s personal

injury settlement through Defendant Bank in order to convert them to the use of Defendant

Murdaugh; in accepting a fee for serving as personal representative from Arthur Badger’s own

personal injury claim; in accepting a fee from the Estate for serving as personal representative in

an amount greatly exceeding the statutorily allowed administrative fee. Each of these acts by

Defendant Laffitte of aiding and abetting Defendant Murdaugh’s fraud allowed Defendants to

engage in clandestine activity including the stealing of funds from Arthur Badger and the Estate.

59. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Laffitte’s and Bank’s actions of

aiding and abetting the fraud of Defendant Murdaugh, Plaintiff has suffered great monetary

damage and is entitled to actual damages and punitive damages as well as interest. Further, under

principles of disgorgement, Plaintiff is entitled to recover all attorney’s fees paid to Defendant

Murdaugh out of all settlements discussed above.

FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Negligence against Defendant Bank)

60. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations contained above as fully and completely as if

repeated verbatim herein.

61. Defendant Bank knew that Defendant Laffitte was serving as personal

representative of the Estate of Donna Badger thereby cloaking Defendant Laffitte with apparent

authority to act on behalf of the Palmetto State Bank. Moreover, Defendant Bank knew that

Page 23 of 27
Defendant Laffitte frequently assisted Defendant Murdaugh in handling client funds as well as his

personal finances in order to manage losses and potential bad investments by the Bank in making

loans or extending credit to Alex Murdaugh.

62. Defendant Bank owed Arthur Badger and the Estate of Donna Badger a duty of

care to properly supervise Defendant Laffitte as well as each of its employees, to properly monitor

all bank accounts including but not limited to the client trust account used by Defendant Murdaugh

and Defendant Bank’s daily cash account, and to follow and carryout all duties imposed on

Defendant Bank as a result of the IOLTA status of Defendant Murdaugh’s client trust account.

63. Defendant Bank breached its duty of care by acting negligently, grossly negligently,

carelessly, recklessly, willfully and wantonly in the following particulars:

a. In failing to properly supervise Defendant Laffitte;

b. In accepting checks that were not endorsed by the payee;

c. In failing to notify the law firm of PMPED of Defendant Murdaugh’s theft,

conversion and fraudulent acts;

d. In hiding its transactions from PMPED as those transactions related to

PMPED client trust account funds;

e. In violating the rules and laws applicable to IOLTA accounts and other
applicable banking regulations in order to attempt to recoup bad
investments;

f. In willfully ignoring warnings related to Defendant Murdaugh’s financial

transactions, including those pertaining to client funds;

g. In failing to properly monitor all bank accounts, including but not limited
to the client trust account used by Defendant Murdaugh and Defendant
Bank’s daily cash account;

h. In failing to act as a reasonable banking institution would have acted under

the same or similar circumstances; and

i. In such other and further particulars as the evidence in trial may show.

Page 24 of 27
 64. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendant Bank,

Plaintiff has suffered great monetary damage and is entitled to actual damages and punitive

damages. Further, under principles of disgorgement, Plaintiff is entitled to recover all attorney’s

fees paid to Defendant Murdaugh out of all settlements discussed above.

FOR A SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANT

(Breach of Fiduciary Duty)

65. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations contained above as fully and completely as if

repeated verbatim herein.

66. Defendant Laffitte, as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Donna Badger,

owed fiduciary duties to the Plaintiff, which duties were likewise owed by Defendant Bank as

Defendant Laffitte acted at all times herein in his capacity as an agent or officer of Defendant

Bank. Further, Defendant Murdaugh, who undertook the legal representation of Arthur Badger

and the Estate of Donna Badger, owed Plaintiff fiduciary duties.

67. The fiduciary duty is the highest duty known to the law.

68. The fiduciary duties owed by Defendants to the Plaintiff include, but are not limited

to, the duty:

a. To act single-mindedly in the best interests of the Plaintiff;

b. To not act fraudulently;

c. To be loyal to the Plaintiffs;

d. To be honest;

e. To refuse to place their own interests above the interests of the Plaintiffs;

f. To refuse to place the interests of themselves or third parties above the

interests of the Plaintiffs;

g. To not commit crimes against the Plaintiffs;

Page 25 of 27
 h. To act in good faith to the Plaintiffs;

i. To safekeep Plaintiffs’ property;

j. To provide the Plaintiffs with full disclosure of all funds, costs, and
expenses;

k. To act with complete honesty to the Plaintiffs;

l. To be competent;

m. To act diligently;

n. To communicate.

69. Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Plaintiff in a number of particulars,

including but not limited to the following:

a. By not providing an accounting;

b. By not protecting the money of Plaintiffs;

c. By stealing or helping steal the Plaintiffs’ funds as described above;

d. By advancing the rights and interests of themselves and third parties over
the rights and interest of the Plaintiffs;

e. By falsely asserting Arthur Badger waived his rights to any settlement funds
from the wrongful death and survival actions;

f. By not providing all of the settlement proceeds;

g. By approving and taking fake or fraudulent expenses or costs;

h. In such other and further particulars as the evidence in the case may
demonstrate.

70. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of Defendants, the Plaintiffs have

been harmed and is entitled to damages, both actual in an amount to be determined by a jury to be

sufficient to compensate him fully for the harm suffered, and punitive in an amount to impress

upon Defendants the seriousness of their conduct and to deter such similar conduct in the future.

Page 26 of 27
 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants in a sum sufficient to

adequately compensate for actual damages, for punitive damages a jury may reasonably award,

for the costs of this action, and for such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and

proper.

GOODING AND GOODING, P.A.

s/Mark B. Tinsley______________
Mark B. Tinsley (SC Bar #15597)
P. O. Box 1000
Allendale, SC 29810
803-587-7676
mark@goodingandgooding.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs

June 2, 2022

Page 27 of 27