Summary
The South Carolina Supreme Court held that an order refusing to set aside an entry of default is not immediately appealable, even when it prevents the defaulting party from seeking to compel arbitration. The court affirmed the Court of Appeals' dismissal of the interlocutory appeal but modified its decision by holding that the Court of Appeals should not have addressed whether the defendants waived their contractual arbitration rights. Those issues could be raised after entry of final judgment.
Holdings
- An order refusing to set aside an entry of default is not immediately appealable, even when it effectively prevents the defaulting party from seeking to compel arbitration.
- There is no federal or state public policy 'favoring' arbitration in a manner that elevates arbitration above otherwise applicable procedural rules or other contractual provisions.
- Challenges to the denial of relief from default, including issues of good cause, excusable neglect, and possible waiver of arbitration, may be raised after final judgment rather than through an immediate appeal from the order denying relief from default.
Questions Presented
- Whether an order refusing to set aside an entry of default is immediately appealable when the order effectively prevents the defaulting party from seeking to compel arbitration.
- Whether South Carolina or federal policy favoring arbitration changes the ordinary rule governing immediate appealability of an order denying relief from an entry of default.
- Whether the court of appeals properly addressed whether the defendants waived their contractual right to arbitration before final judgment.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (16)
- Palmetto Constr. Grp., LLC v. Restoration Specialists, LLC, 428 S.C. 261, 266, 834 S.E.2d 204, 206 (Ct. App. 2019)(followed in part; modified)
- Cape Romain Contractors, Inc. v. Wando E., LLC, 405 S.C. 115, 121 n.4, 747 S.E.2d 461, 464 n.4 (2013)(distinguished)
- Towles v. United HealthCare Corp., 338 S.C. 29, 34-35, 524 S.E.2d 839, 842-43 (Ct. App. 1999)(followed)
- Thynes v. Lloyd, 294 S.C. 152, 153-54, 363 S.E.2d 122, 122-23 (Ct. App. 1987)(followed)
- Johnson ex rel. Jefferson v. Gene's Used Cars, Inc., 295 S.C. 317, 317, 368 S.E.2d 456, 456 (1988)(followed)
- Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1, 24 (1983)(limited)
- Zabinski v. Bright Acres Assocs., 346 S.C. 580, 596, 553 S.E.2d 110, 118 (2001)(limited)
- Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Byrd, 470 U.S. 213, 219-20 (1985)(followed)
- Trident Technical College v. Lucas & Stubbs, Ltd., 286 S.C. 98, 103-04, 333 S.E.2d 781, 784-85 (1985)(limited)
- Harwell v. Home Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 228 S.C. 594, 599, 91 S.E.2d 273, 275 (1956)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 16.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…