Case ID: sc_307/html/0440-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Harwell, Chief Justice:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

23596
    BUILDERAMA, INC., Respondent v. Otto MORTON d/b/a Morton Home Builders, Appellant.
    (415 S.E. (2d) 796)
    Supreme Court
    
      Frank B. McMaster, Columbia, for appellant.
    
    
      Vincent H. Davison, Jr., Augusta, Ga., for respondent.
    
    Submitted Feb. 19, 1992.
    Decided Mar. 16, 1992.
   Harwell, Chief Justice:

The issue is whether the trial judge erred in denying appellant Otto Morton d/b/a Morton Home Builders a jury trial. We reverse and remand for trial.

I. FACTS

Respondent Builderama, Inc. instituted a collection action against appellant for the balance due on a commercial credit account. Appellant denied the allegations of the complaint, asserted a counterclaim, and demanded a jury trial. The trial judge denied appellant’s demand for a jury trial and referred the action to the master-in-equity.

II. DISCUSSION

Appellant asserts that the trial judge erred in denying him a jury trial. We agree.

Issues of fact in an action for the recovery of money must be tried by a jury, unless a jury trial be waived. Rule 38(a), SCRCP. The compulsory order of reference to the master-inequity deprived appellant of a mode of trial to which he is entitled as a matter of right, and thus was improper.

We hold that the trial judge erred in denying appellant a jury trial. The order of the trial judge denying appellant’s demand for a jury trial is reversed, and the case remanded for trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Chandler, Finney, Toal and Moore, JJ., concur.