Nunnery v. Brantley Construction Co., Inc.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
1DissentCureton, Judge
(dissenting):. I disagree with the majority’s holding that Brantley’s claim for arbitration is barred by principles of res judicata. In disagreeing, I view the facts somewhat differently from the majority.
*212The record before us contains no live testimony, but only the pleadings and affidavits of several persons.1 As I view the pleadings,. contract and affidavits, the following facts appear.2 Brantley and Nunnery entered into a contract that required Nunnery to install a new roof on a Navy building. Nunnery installed the roof defectively, thus requiring Nunnery to perform certain repairs to it.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Charles J. Frank, Inc. v. Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
- King v. OxfordCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1984
- Vincent v. Salt Lake CountyUtah Supreme Court · 1978
- Bagwell v. HintonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1944
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.