Burton v. Lexington County Solicitor

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Burton v. Lexington County Solicitor

DecidedJanuary 12, 2022

Docket2019-001252

StatusUnpublished

This text of Burton v. Lexington County Solicitor (Burton v. Lexington County Solicitor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burton v. Lexington County Solicitor, (S.C. Ct. App. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

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

Charles F. Burton, Appellant,

v.

Lexington County Solicitor, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2019-001252

Appeal From Lexington County R. Lawton McIntosh, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2022-UP-012 Submitted November 1, 2021 – Filed January 12, 2022

AFFIRMED

Charles Thomas Brooks, III, of The Law Office of Charles T. Brooks, III, of Sumter, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Harley Littleton Kirkland, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Charles F. Burton appeals the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Lexington County Solicitor in Burton's action for an expungement. On appeal, Burton argues the circuit court erred in finding no genuine issues of material fact existed. We find this argument is unpreserved for appellate review because Burton conceded at the summary judgment hearing that no facts were in dispute. Accordingly, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the [circuit court] to be preserved for appellate review."); TNS Mills, Inc. v. S.C. Dep't of Revenue, 331 S.C. 611, 617, 503 S.E.2d 471, 474 (1998) ("An issue conceded in a lower court may not be argued on appeal."); State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 694 (2003) ("A party may not argue one ground at trial and an alternate ground on appeal.").

AFFIRMED.1

KONDUROS, HILL, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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

Charles F. Burton, Appellant,

v.

Lexington County Solicitor, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2019-001252

Appeal From Lexington County R. Lawton McIntosh, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2022-UP-012 Submitted November 1, 2021 – Filed January 12, 2022

AFFIRMED

Charles Thomas Brooks, III, of The Law Office of Charles T. Brooks, III, of Sumter, for Appellant.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Attorney General Harley Littleton Kirkland, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Charles F. Burton appeals the circuit court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Lexington County Solicitor in Burton's action for an expungement. On appeal, Burton argues the circuit court erred in finding no genuine issues of material fact existed. We find this argument is unpreserved for appellate review because Burton conceded at the summary judgment hearing that no facts were in dispute. Accordingly, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the [circuit court] to be preserved for appellate review."); TNS Mills, Inc. v. S.C. Dep't of Revenue, 331 S.C. 611, 617, 503 S.E.2d 471, 474 (1998) ("An issue conceded in a lower court may not be argued on appeal."); State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C. 138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 694 (2003) ("A party may not argue one ground at trial and an alternate ground on appeal.").

AFFIRMED.1

KONDUROS, HILL, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Burton v. Lexington County Solicitor, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burton-v-lexington-county-solicitor-scctapp-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack