Case Name: BUILDERAMA, INC., Respondent v. Otto MORTON d/b/a Morton Home Builders, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1992-03-16
Citations: 307 S.C. 440
Docket Number: 23596
Parties: BUILDERAMA, INC., Respondent v. Otto MORTON d/b/a Morton Home Builders, Appellant.
Judges: Chandler, Finney, Toal and Moore, JJ., concur.
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 307
Pages: 440–441

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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-in equity 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.