Southeastern PVC Pipe, Mfg., Inc. v. Rothrock Const. Co., Inc.

• Decision Date: 14 December 1983
• Docket Number: No. 0090,0090
• Citation: 313 S.E.2d 50,280 S.C. 498
• Court: South Carolina Court of Appeals
• Parties: , 38 UCC Rep.Serv. 464 SOUTHEASTERN PVC PIPE, MFG., INC., Appellant, v. ROTHROCK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Respondent. . Heard

Page 50

313 S.E.2d 50

280 S.C. 498, 38 UCC Rep.Serv. 464

SOUTHEASTERN PVC PIPE, MFG., INC., Appellant, v. ROTHROCK CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Respondent.

No. 0090.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

Heard Dec. 14, 1983.

Decided Feb. 21, 1984.

Robert S. Haight, Jr., of Harry Pavilack & Associates, Myrtle Beach, for appellant.

Dalton B. Floyd, Jr., of Floyd, Cutts & Patrick, Surfside Beach, for respondent.

GOOLSBY, Judge:

The appellant Southeastern PVC Pipe Manufacturing, Inc., brought an action against the respondent Rothrock Construction Company, Inc., to recover an amount owed by Rothrock for the purchase of pipes and other items. Rothrock counterclaimed alleging that Southeastern breached implied warranties of merchantability and of fitness for a particular purpose. The trial judge, sitting without a jury, affirmed the findings and recommendation of a special referee that Rothrock owed Southeastern the sum of $3,242.95. The trial judge, however, reversed the findings and recommendation regarding Rothrock's counterclaim and held that Southeastern had breached an implied warranty of merchantability and that Rothrock, as a consequence, was entitled to the sum of $7,176.85 in damages less the amount which it owed Southeastern. We affirm.

The question on appeal concerns whether the evidence reasonably supports the findings of the trial judge that Southeastern breached an implied warranty of merchantability and that Rothrock sustained damage as a result.

Because this is an action at law tried by the judge without a jury, the trial judge's findings of fact "have the force and effect of a jury verdict and are conclusive upon appeal when supported by competent evidence." Wallace Concrete Pipe Company v. Downs, L.P., 272 S.C. 335 at 337, 251 S.E.2d 759 (1979). The rule is no different where, as here, the findings were made with a reference. Townes Associates, Ltd. v. City of Greenville, 266 S.C. 81, 221 S.E.2d 773 (1976). In a case like the instant one, therefore, we can neither weigh the evidence nor determine its preponderance. Id. All we can do is to determine whether there is any evidence that reasonably supports the factual findings of the trial judge. Wallace Concrete Pipe Company v. Downs, L.P., supra. Our review of the record reveals the presence of such evidence.

The testimony showed that in 1977 Rothrock purchased a quantity of pipes and solvent weld saddle tee joints from Southeastern for the purpose of constructing sewer lines. The saddle tee joints were required to make lateral connections. They came without straps, bands, or other extrinsic binders. Rothrock's superintendent for the job, George H. Skipper, Jr., was an experienced pipeline installer. Never before, however, had he laid pipe without using bands on lateral joints. Before the saddle tee joints were installed, Skipper expressed concern to James C. Gowan, Jr., Southeastern's sales representative, about the absence of bands. After checking with others, Gowan assured Skipper that bands were not necessary for the proper installation of the saddle tee joints. Gowan added, however, that Rothrock could use bands, if it wanted to, but Rothrock would have to bear their expense. Still concerned and in an attempt to make certain that the cement properly held, Skipper secured the saddle tee joints with tie wire. Approximately 80 saddle tee joints...