HHH Ltd. of Greenville v. Hiller
Decision Date | 29 June 2016 |
Docket Number | 2016-UP-338 |
Court | South Carolina Court of Appeals |
Parties | HHH Ltd. of Greenville, Respondent, v. Randall S. Hiller, Robert E. Hiller, and Randall S. Hiller, P.A., Appellants. Appellate Case No. 2015-000159 |
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
Submitted April 1, 2016
Appeal From Greenville County Letitia H. Verdin, Circuit Court Judge.
Randall Scott Hiller, of Greenville, for Appellants.
Randy A. Skinner, of Skinner Law Firm, LLC, John T. Crawford, Jr. of Kenison Dudley & Crawford, LLC, and M. Stokely Holder of Holder, Padgett, Littlejohn & Prickett, LLC, all of Greenville, for Respondent.
Appeal dismissed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Mountain Lake Colony v. McJunkin, 308 S.C. 202, 204, 417 S.E.2d 578, 579 (1992) ( ); Williford v. Downs, 265 S.C. 319, 321, 218 S.E.2d 242, 243 (1975) (a party of a mode of trial to which he is entitled) an exception to the general rule if the reference order's result will deprive ; Verenes v. Alvanos, 387 S.C. 11, 15, 690 S.E.2d 771, 772 (2010) ("Whether a party is entitled to a jury trial is a question of law."); Wachovia Bank, Nat'l Ass'n v. Blackburn, 407 S.C. 321, 328, 755 S.E.2d 437, 441 (2014) (); Albertson v. Robinson, 371 S.C. 311, 315, 638 S.E.2d 81, 83 (Ct. App. 2006) ("An action to set aside a transfer as fraudulent pursuant to the Statute of Elizabeth is an action in equity."); Williford, 265 S.C. at 321, 218 S.E.2d at 243 (); Blackburn, 407 S.C. at 328, 755 S.E.2d at 441 ("However, counterclaims–including those raised in equitable actions–may, at times, be entitled to a jury trial."); id. at 329, 755 S.E.2d at 441 ; id. at 328, 755 S.E.2d at 441 ("If the complaint is equitable and the counterclaim is legal and permissive, the defendant waives his right to a jury trial."); First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co. of S.C. v. Hucks, 305 S.C. 296, 298, 408 S.E.2d 222, 223 (1991) (); N.C. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. DAV Corp., 298 S.C. 514, 518, 381 S.E.2d 903, 905 (1989) ( ); Beach Co. v. Twillman, Ltd., 351 S.C. 56, 61, 566 S.E.2d 863, 865 (Ct. App. 2002) ().[1]
APPEAL DISMISSED.[2]
---------
Notes:
[1] Appellant also appeals the circuit court's denial of his motion for summary judgment. We do not address this issue because it too is not immediately appealable. See Watson v. Underwood, 407 S.C. 443 457, 756 S.E.2d 155, 162 (Ct. App. 2...
To continue reading
Request your trial