Campbell v. Lyerly

Opinion

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Harvey R. Campbell, Jr., d/b/a Metal Construction and Roofing, Appellant,

v.

Lee Lyerly and Ellen Marie Stone Lyerly, Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2016-002315

Appeal From Florence County William H. Seals, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2017-UP-438 Submitted October 1, 2017 – Filed November 22, 2017

AFFIRMED

Louis David Nettles, of Folkens Law Firm, P.A., of Florence, for Appellant.

Gary Ivan Finklea, of Finklea Law Firm, of Florence, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 40-59-30(B) (2011) ("[A] person or firm who first has not procured a license or registered with the [South Carolina Residential Builders Commission] and is required to do so by law may not file a mechanics' lien or bring an action at law or in equity to enforce the provisions of a contract for residential building or residential specialty contracting which the person or firm entered into in violation of this chapter."); Martin v. Ellisor, 266 S.C. 377, 381, 223 S.E.2d 415, 417 (1976) ("When . . . the statute is plain and unambiguous, it becomes the duty of the court to apply it literally because the legislative design is unmistakable."); Duckworth v. Cameron, 270 S.C. 647, 649, 244 S.E.2d 217, 218 (1978) ("Any builder who violates [section 40-59-30(B)] by entering into a contract for home construction without obtaining the required license simply cannot enforce the contract.").

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.