Cartin v. Keller Bldg. Products of Charleston, 23068

• Decision Date: 07 March 1989
• Docket Number: No. 23068,23068
• Citation: 382 S.E.2d 922,299 S.C. 152
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: Nortin S. CARTIN, Respondent, v. KELLER BUILDING PRODUCTS OF CHARLESTON, Appellant. . Heard

Page 922

382 S.E.2d 922

299 S.C. 152

Nortin S. CARTIN, Respondent, v. KELLER BUILDING PRODUCTS OF CHARLESTON, Appellant.

No. 23068.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Heard March 7, 1989.

Decided Aug. 21, 1989.

Wm. Howell Morrison of Holmes & Thomson, Charleston, for appellant.

A. Elliott Barrow, Jr. of Claypoole, Kefalos, Waggoner and Barrow, Charleston, for respondent.

FINNEY, Justice:

This is an appeal of a circuit court order granting respondent, Nortin S. Cartin, a new trial on damages only. The appellant, Keller Building Products, appeals to this Court for a new trial asserting the trial judge abused his discretion in not ordering a new trial absolute and erred by qualifying the respondent's architect as an expert witness. We reverse.

While descending a carpeted stairway, the respondent fell and fractured his neck. Respondent brought suit against the appellant alleging that his fall was proximately caused by loose carpet sold by appellant and negligently installed by its employee, Paul Payton. Appellant denied responsibility and asserted that the carpet installer was an independent contractor. Appellant further asserted that the actual cause of the fall was the dangerous construction of the stairwell itself.

After some deliberation, the jury requested written definitions of agent and independent contractor. Following the trial judge's denial of this request, the jury found for Cartin but awarded him only one dollar in actual damages. Both parties moved for a new trial. Cartin requested a new trial on the issue of damages only while Keller requested a new trial absolute. The trial court granted a new trial on damages only based upon its determination that the jury disregarded the instructions on damages and was motivated by passion, ill will or prejudice, but cited no facts from the record to support its finding. The trial judge also held that liability and damages are separate and distinct from one another.

The law in South Carolina is clear that when a verdict in favor of a plaintiff is fully supported by the evidence on the issue of liability but the damages awarded are inadequate, a new trial may be ordered on the issue of damages alone. S.C.R.C.P. 59(a). (Emphasis added.) This Court has succinctly articulated the rule by which the trial court is to be guided in granting a new trial on a single issue as follows:

"... where there are distinct jury issues, and the issue as to which a new trial is required is separate from all other issues, and the error requiring a new trial does not affect the determination of any other issue, the scope of the new trial may be limited to the single issue." Industrial Welding Supplies, Inc....