Opinion
2022-UP-181 Appellate Case 2019-001735
04-27-2022
Frontage Road Associates, Inc., also known as Frontage Road, Inc., Respondent, v. Elephant, Inc. and Gregory Gaines, also known as Kenwood Gaines, Appellants.
Robert L. Widener and Paul D. Harrill, both of Burr & Forman LLP, of Columbia, for Appellants. Oscar W. Bannister, of Bannister, Wyatt & Stalvey, LLC, of Greenville, for Respondent.
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.
Submitted April 14, 2022
Appeal From Greenville County Robin B. Stilwell, Circuit Court Judge
Robert L. Widener and Paul D. Harrill, both of Burr & Forman LLP, of Columbia, for Appellants.
Oscar W. Bannister, of Bannister, Wyatt & Stalvey, LLC, of Greenville, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Elephant, Inc. and Gregory Gains (collectively, Tenants) appeal the circuit court's denial of their motion to transfer the case to the nonjury docket. On appeal, Tenants contend Frontage Road Associates, Inc. (Landlord) waived its right to a jury trial, and the circuit court abused its discretion by denying the motion to transfer because Landlord had not demanded a jury trial. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.
Rule 38(b), SCRCP, provides a "party may demand a trial by jury of any issue triable of right by a jury by serving upon the other parties a demand." The intent of this rule is to provide notice to other parties. We interpret Rule 38(b) as it applies to electronic filing to allow a party to demand a jury trial by choosing the jury demand option during e-filing of the complaint.
At the time Landlord initiated this case within the Electronic Filing System, it selected "Yes" to the jury demand option. This selection had the effect of placing the case on the jury roster and designating the "File Type" on the case view screen as "Jury," which was visible to any e-filing participant in the case. Thus, we agree with the circuit court that Tenant was "not caught unaware of the pendency of this case as a jury trial" and therefore find the circuit court did not err by denying Tenants' motion to transfer.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
JGEATHERS and HILL, JJ., and LOCKEMY, A., concur.