Court Opinion

ID: 9591542
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:04:58.58082+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:08.646099
License: Public Domain

*511Gregory, Justice
(Concurring):
I agree with the majority opinion; however, I feel compelled to discuss this case as it relates to our recent opinion in D.S.S. v. Fingerlin, 328 S. E. (2d) 71 (S. C. 1985).
The dissenting opinion cites Fingerlin for the proposition that S. C. Code Ann. § 20-7-420 (1976) deprived the Circuit Court of jurisdiction in domestic matters, and contends this is a domestic matter.
While Fingerlin does hold Section 20-7-420 confers exclusive jurisdiction in domestic matters, it has no effect in the instant case. As the majority notes, the action instituted by Respondent is for a debt, and is purely contractual in nature. Only the Circuit Court has jurisdiction in such matters.
The instant action is not a pure domestic case; therefore, Fingerlin has no application to these facts.