Deutsche Bank v. Morrow

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: June 8, 2016
• Docket: 2016-UP-264
• Status: Unpublished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

Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-FFI Pass- Through Certificates, Series 2006-FFI, Respondent,

v.

Dora S. Morrow, Ray Martin, and Lease and Rental Management Corp. d/b/a Auto Use and Auto Loan, a Massachusetts Corporation, Southern New Hampshire Bank and Trust Company, a New Hampshire Bank, and Edman Hackworth, Defendants.

Edman Hackworth, 3rd Party Plaintiff,

John Morrow, 3rd Party Defendant.

John Morrow and Dora Morrow, 3rd Party Plaintiffs,

Of Whom John Morrow and Dora Morrow are the Appellants,

Edman Hackworth and Debbie Hackworth, 3rd Party Defendants,

Of Whom Edman Hackworth is a Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2014-002381 Appeal From Greenville County Charles B. Simmons, Jr., Master-in-Equity

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-264 Submitted February 1, 2016 – Filed June 8, 2016

AFFIRMED

David Richard Price, Jr., of David R. Price, Jr., P.A., of Greenville, for Appellants.

Daniel Quigley Orvin and Matthew Tillman, both of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, LLP, of Charleston, for Respondent Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2006- FFI Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-FFI.

Thomas Elihue Dudley, III, of Kenison Dudley & Crawford, LLC, of Greenville, for Respondent Edman Hackworth.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed 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) ("[A]n issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review."); Mize v. Blue Ridge Ry. Co., 219 S.C. 119, 129-30, 64 S.E.2d 253, 258 (1951) (finding if an appellant does not raise an issue at trial, but the trial judge addresses it, it is still not preserved for appeal because it was not raised by the appellant); Johnson v. Sonoco Prods. Co., 381 S.C. 172, 177, 672 S.E.2d 567, 570 (2009) ("An issue may not be raised for the first time in a motion to reconsider."). AFFIRMED. 1

HUFF, A.C.J., and KONDUROS and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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