finding that no rational basis appears for making a distinction between architects, engineers, and contractors, on one hand, and owners and manufacturers, on the other, for the purpose of establishing a statute of limitations to recover damages for any deficiency in design of an improvement to realty under S.C.Code Ann. § 15-3-670 (1976)
How later courts described this case
- finding that no rational basis appears for making a distinction between architects, engineers, and contractors, on one hand, and owners and manufacturers, on the other, for the purpose of establishing a statute of limitations to recover damages for any deficiency in design of an improvement to realty under S.C.Code Ann. § 15-3-670 (1976)
- holding the statute violates open courts provision
- stating that the statute violates equal protection
- finding the statute to violate open courts provision
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Gregory, Justice
(concurring in result) :
I, too, would reverse, but on a ground not relied on in the majority opinion.
Article III, Section 17, Constitution of the State of South Carolina, 1895, provides:
Every Act or resolution having the force of law shall relate to but one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title.
The purpose of this provision “is to prevent the General Assembly from being misled into the passage of bills containing provisions not indicated in their titles, and to apprise the people of the subject of proposed legislation and thus give them opportunity to be heard if they so desire. Accordingly, while it is to be construed with great liberality so as not to embarrass or obstruct needed legislation, liberality of construction should not be extended to such a point as to foster the abuses which its provisions are designed to prevent.” Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co. v. S. C. Tax Commission, 233 S. C. 129, 103 S. E. (2d) 908 (1958).
Sections 15-3-630 through 15-3-670, 1976 Code of Laws of South Carolina, were enacted as Act No. 1071 of the 1970 Acts of the General Assembly. The title to Act No. 1071 reads as follows:
An Act To Amend The Code of Laws Of South Carolina, 1962, By Adding Sections 10-151 Through 10-155, So As To Provide A Limitation For The Bringing Of Actions In *233 Contract Or Tort Malpractice, Error Or Mistake Against Architects, Professional Engineers And Contractors.
Although Act No. 1071 relates to but one subject, that subject is not expressed in its title. The most cursory reading of Act No. 1071 (Sections 15-3-630 through 15-3-670) reveals the Act does not provide a statute of limitations as its title purports, but instead operates to bar a cause of action before it accrues. This distinction is material.
I would reverse on the ground the questioned statutes were enacted in violation of Article III, Section 17 and do not reach the other grounds asserted by appellant for reversal.