Montgomery Holdings, LLC d/b/a IBI Builders v. Christopher J. Merlo and Grandsouth Bank; Christopher J. Merlo v. Gregory K. Grissinger, Jr. and John Montgomery

Summary

The South Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed a master-in-equity judgment awarding Montgomery Holdings, LLC $402,861.66 and ordering foreclosure and sale of property in a dispute arising from the construction of a custom home. The court rejected challenges concerning breach of contract, consideration for a guaranty, construction defects, change-order charges, negligence, fiduciary duty, and the effect of satisfying the judgment during the appeal. The court also held that several appellate arguments were abandoned or unpreserved.

Holdings

1. Payment and satisfaction of a judgment do not automatically waive the right to appeal, moot the controversy, or estop the appellant absent circumstances showing a compromise or agreement to end the litigation and provided restitution could be enforced if the judgment were reversed.
2. Merlo was not entitled to judgment on his breach-of-contract claim because the evidence did not clearly establish that the basement height or other challenged construction differed from the plans, Merlo had acquiesced to or participated in certain changes, and he failed to prove resulting damages.
3. The guaranty was supported by new consideration because IBI agreed to forbear immediate collection of contractually due add-ons and overages and to carry them on the balance sheet until completion of the project.
4. The absence of specific invoices for identified add-ons and overages did not require directed verdicts for Merlo because testimony and balance-sheet evidence provided a sufficient basis for the charges, and Merlo did not present contrary evidence or establish what the charges should have been.
5. A directed verdict must be denied when the evidence permits more than one reasonable inference or the inference is doubtful, and appellate courts may not resolve credibility conflicts; factual findings in a nonjury law action are affirmed when reasonably supported by evidence.
6. Issues supported only by conclusory assertions without factual argument or authority are abandoned, and a party may not argue one evidentiary or procedural ground at trial and an alternative ground on appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Merlo's payment and satisfaction of the judgment waived, mooted, or otherwise barred his appeal.
2. Whether the master erred in denying Merlo's motions for directed verdict on his breach-of-contract claims based on the basement ceiling height, alleged deviations from the plans, and lack of consideration for the guaranty.
3. Whether the absence of specific invoices for certain add-ons and overages required directed verdicts on Merlo's negligence, fraud, negligent-misrepresentation, SCUTPA, and breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims.
4. Whether IBI breached the construction contract by failing to build according to the plans, including issues involving basement height, driveway and boulder-wall encroachments, and a retaining wall.
5. Whether the master erred in rejecting Merlo's negligence, fiduciary-duty, change-order, judicial-notice, and damages arguments.
6. Whether the master's factual findings were supported by evidence.

Disposition

affirmed