Osteen v. T.E. Cuttino Construction Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Harwell, Chief Justice:
We are asked to determine the enforceability of an arbitration clause contained in a standard form construction contract. The trial judge found that the arbitration clause was invalid under South Carolina law, and that the parties should proceed with their dispute in a judicial forum. We reverse.
I. FACTS
The underlying dispute arises out of the alleged breach of a contract entered into by appellant T.E. Cuttino Construction Company (Cuttino) and predecessors to respondents H. Graham Osteen, II and Julia R. Osteen (the Osteens) for the construction of a residence. The…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Jr. U.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Southland Corp. v. KeatingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Johnston County v. R. N. Rouse & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
- Episcopal Housing Corp. v. Federal InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1977
- Barbier v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1990
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Zabinski v. Bright Acres AssociatesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
- Toler's Cove Homeowners Ass'n v. Trident Construction Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
- Soil Remediation Co. v. Nu-Way Environmental, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
- Tritech Electric, Inc. v. Frank M. Hall & Co.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 2000
- Hurst v. SandyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1997
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.