First South Bank v. Clifton Corporation

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

First South Bank v. Clifton Corporation

DecidedDecember 16, 2008

Docket2008-UP-712

StatusUnpublished

This text of First South Bank v. Clifton Corporation (First South Bank v. Clifton Corporation) 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

First South Bank v. Clifton Corporation, (S.C. Ct. App. 2008).

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 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

First South Bank, Respondent,

v.

The Clifton Corporation, Charles B. Mierek, South Carolina Department of Revenue, South Carolina Employment Security Commission, Branch Banking and Trust Company, and Regions Bank, Defendants,

of whom:

The Clifton Corporation and Charles B. Mierek are Appellants.

Appeal From Spartanburg County
Gordon G. Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-712
Heard October 21, 2008 Filed December 16, 2008

AFFIRMED

William E. Booth, III, of West Columbia, for Appellants.

David L. Walsh, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: The Clifton Corporation and Charles B. Mierek appeal the master-in-equitys order denying their motion to vacate a foreclosure sale. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR and the following authorities: Wogan v. Kunze, 366 S.C. 583, 608, 623 S.E.2d 107, 121 (Ct. App. 2005) (stating a party may not argue one theory before the trial court and another on appeal), affd as modified, 379 S.C. 581, 666 S.E.2d 901 (2008); see also 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 trial judge to be preserved for appellate review.); Anderson v. Short, 323 S.C. 522, 525, 476 S.E.2d 475, 477 (1996) (stating where a decision is based on more than one ground, the appellate court will affirm unless the appellant appeals all grounds because the unappealed ground will become the law of the case); First Union Natl Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 566, 511 S.E.2d 372, 378 (Ct. App. 1998) (holding an unchallenged ruling, right or wrong, is the law of the case and requires affirmance).

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., and HUFF and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

First South Bank, Respondent,

v.

The Clifton Corporation, Charles B. Mierek, South Carolina Department of Revenue, South Carolina Employment Security Commission, Branch Banking and Trust Company, and Regions Bank, Defendants,

of whom:

The Clifton Corporation and Charles B. Mierek are Appellants.

Appeal From Spartanburg County
Gordon G. Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-712
Heard October 21, 2008 Filed December 16, 2008

AFFIRMED

William E. Booth, III, of West Columbia, for Appellants.

David L. Walsh, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: The Clifton Corporation and Charles B. Mierek appeal the master-in-equitys order denying their motion to vacate a foreclosure sale. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR and the following authorities: Wogan v. Kunze, 366 S.C. 583, 608, 623 S.E.2d 107, 121 (Ct. App. 2005) (stating a party may not argue one theory before the trial court and another on appeal), affd as modified, 379 S.C. 581, 666 S.E.2d 901 (2008); see also 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 trial judge to be preserved for appellate review.); Anderson v. Short, 323 S.C. 522, 525, 476 S.E.2d 475, 477 (1996) (stating where a decision is based on more than one ground, the appellate court will affirm unless the appellant appeals all grounds because the unappealed ground will become the law of the case); First Union Natl Bank of S.C. v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 566, 511 S.E.2d 372, 378 (Ct. App. 1998) (holding an unchallenged ruling, right or wrong, is the law of the case and requires affirmance).

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., and HUFF and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

First South Bank v. Clifton Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-south-bank-v-clifton-corporation-scctapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack