T. S. Martin Homes v. Cornerstone Columbia

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 Appeal From Richland County Clifton Newman, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-196 Submitted January 29, 2003 – Filed March 13, 2003 AFFIRMED Daniel T. Brailsford, of Columbia; for Appellant.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.