Cole v. Heyward

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: February 24, 2021
• Docket: 2018-001554
• Status: Unpublished

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

Yvette Cole, Appellant,

v.

Shirley Heyward, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2018-001554

Appeal From Hampton County Walter H. Sanders, Jr., Special Referee

Unpublished Opinion No. 2021-UP-055 Submitted February 1, 2021 – Filed February 24, 2021

AFFIRMED

Yvette Cole, of New York, New York, pro se.

Shirley Heyward, of Estill, pro se.

PER CURIAM: Yvette Cole appeals the special referee's order dismissing her action to quiet title against Shirley Heyward, arguing the special referee erred in (1) rendering a decision on the wrong property, and (2) refusing to recuse himself. Cole further argues a title search of the correct property determined she was the sole owner. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR. We find Cole has failed to provide a sufficient record upon which this court can make a decision. See Rule 210(h), SCACR ("[T]he appellate court will not consider any fact which does not appear in the Record on Appeal."); Medlock v. One 1985 Jeep Cherokee VIN 1JCWB7828FT129001, 322 S.C. 127, 132, 470 S.E.2d 373, 376 (1996) ("The appellant has the burden of providing this court with a sufficient record upon which to make a decision."); Germain v. Nichol, 278 S.C. 508, 509, 299 S.E.2d 335, 335 (1983) (affirming the trial court's judgment when the appellant failed to provide "any of the trial testimony" in the record on appeal to support his argument on appeal).

We further find Cole's issues have been abandoned on appeal. See S.C. Dep't of Transp. v. M & T Enters. of Mt. Pleasant, LLC, 379 S.C. 645, 659, 667 S.E.2d 7, 15 (Ct. App. 2008) ("[E]ven if an issue is preserved at the trial court level, it must still be properly raised and argued to the appellate court."); Glasscock, Inc. v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 348 S.C. 76, 81, 557 S.E.2d 689, 691 (Ct. App. 2001) ("South Carolina law clearly states that short, conclusory statements made without supporting authority are deemed abandoned on appeal and therefore not presented for review.").

AFFIRMED.1

WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and HILL, JJ., concur.

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