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.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

303 Associates, LLC, Respondent,

v.

A to Z Coatings & Sons, Inc., Ray Stocks, and R.D. Ayers, Defendants,

Of whom A to Z Coatings and Sons, Inc. is the Appellant.

Appeal From Beaufort County
Curtis L. Coltrane, Master in Equity

Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-548
Submitted November 2, 2009 � Filed November 23, 2009

AFFIRMED

R. Thayer Rivers, Jr., of Ridgeland, for Appellant.

PER CURIAM: A to Z Coatings and Sons, Inc. (A to Z), appeals the master in equity's order finding A to Z breached its contract and warranty for the installation of a roofing system on property owned by 303 Associates, LLC (303).� We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1.� As to whether the master erred in finding A to Z breached the terms of the contract: Hawkins v. Greenwood Dev. Corp., 328 S.C. 585, 593, 493 S.E.2d 875, 879 (Ct. App. 1997) (explaining a party claiming impossibility of performance has the burden of proving the defense and impossibility must be real and not a mere inconvenience); Id. ("A party to a contract cannot be excused from performance on the theory of impossibility of performance unless it is made to appear that the thing to be done cannot by any means be accomplished, for if it is only improbable or out of the power of the obligor, it is not deemed in law impossible."); Moon v. Jordan, 301 S.C. 161, 164, 390 S.E.2d 488, 490 (Ct. App. 1990) (holding a �party to a contract must perform its obligations under a contract unless its performance is rendered impossible by an act of God, the law, or by a third party).

2.� As to whether the master in equity erred in its award of damages and finding A to Z liable for a contract it did not sign: In re Care and Treatment of McCracken, 346 S.C. 87, 93, 551 S.E.2d 235, 239 (2001) ("A bald assertion, without supporting argument, does not preserve an issue for appeal.").

3.� As to whether the master in equity erred in finding A to Z liable for attorney's fees: Historic Charleston Holdings, LLC v. Mallon, 381 S.C. 417, 436, 673 S.E.2d 448, 458 (2009) (stating attorney's fees are recoverable if authorized by contract or statute).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.