T. S. Martin Homes v. Cornerstone Columbia

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: March 13, 2003
• Docket: 2003-UP-196
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

T.S. Martin Homes, L.P.,        Appellant,

v.

Cornerstone Columbia, LLC, and The American Arbitration Association, Inc.,        Defendants,

Of Whom Cornerstone Columbia, LLC, is the        Respondent.

---

Appeal From Richland County
Clifton Newman, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-196
Submitted January 29, 2003 – Filed March 13, 2003 

---

AFFIRMED

---

Daniel T. Brailsford, of Columbia; for Appellant.

James C. Gray, Jr, Esquire; Thomas M. Kennaday, of Columbia; for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  T.S. Martin, LLC appeals the circuit court’s order granting Cornerstone’s motion to dismiss a complaint filed by T.S. Martin pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP.  We affirm [1] pursuant to Rule 220(c), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Munoz v. Green Tree Financial, 343 S.C. 531, 540, 542 S.E.2d 360, 364 (2001) (“While the requirements of [a statute] may be raised on the merits of the contract’s enforceability . . . these requirements do not apply to determine the validity of the arbitration clause itself.”); Zabinski v. Bright Acres Assocs., 346 S.C. 580, 596, 553 S.E.2d 110, 118 (2001) (stating that the policy of the United States and South Carolina is to favor arbitration); Heffner v. Destiny, Inc., 321 S.C. 536, 537, 471 S.E.2d 135, 136 (1995); Gaskins v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co., 343 S.C. 666, 671, 541 S.E.2d 269, 271-72 (Ct. App. 2000) (granting a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss is warranted if the factual allegations, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, together with the inferences reasonably deducible therefrom, would not entitle the plaintiff to relief under any theory of the case). 

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., GOOLSBY and SHULER, JJ., concur.

---

[1]   We affirm this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.