Full text
Hubbard v. Owens
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court
Kimberly H. Hubbard and John Hubbard, Respondents,
v.
Jack R. Owens, Marlboro County Farm Bureau, Ace Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Defendants,
Of Whom Jack R. Owens is the Appellant.
Appeal from Marlboro County John M. Milling, Circuit Court Judge
Memorandum Opinion No. 2007-MO-034 Submitted May 23, 2007 Filed June 11, 2007
AFFIRMED
Ronald J. Tryon and Michael E. Kozlarek, both of Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, of Columbia, for Appellant.
James C. Rushton, III, of the Hyman Law Firm, of Florence, for Respondents.
PER CURIAM: Respondents Kimberly H. and John Hubbard (the Hubbards) filed a lawsuit against Appellant Jack R. Owens (Owens) and two insurance companies. On appeal, Owens argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the complaint, his motion for judgment on the pleadings, and his motion to compel arbitration of the Hubbards claims.
We affirm the trial courts decision pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: Johnson v. South Carolina Dept of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services, __ S.C. __, 641 S.E.2d 895, 897 (2007) (providing that this Court will not entertain the merits of an issue on appeal where the record on appeal is inadequate for review); Woodard v. Westvaco Corp., 319 S.C. 240, 242-43, 460 S.E.2d 392, 393-94 (1995) (providing that the denial of a Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss is an interlocutory order which is not immediately appealable); Ballenger v. Bowen, 313 S.C. 476, 477-78, 443 S.E.2d 379, 380 (1994) (providing that an order denying a motion for summary judgment is not appealable); Moyd v. Johnson, 289 S.C. 482, 482, 347 S.E.2d 97, 98 (1986) (holding that the denial of a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss is an interlocutory order which, ordinarily, is not immediately appealable); and South Carolina Dept. of Soc. Services v. Thompson, 273 S.C. 569, 571, 257 S.E.2d 747, 748 (1979) (providing that res judicata is an affirmative defense that must be pled to be established).
TOAL, C.J., MOORE, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur. WALLER, J., not participating.