Frierson v. Clark

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: May 7, 2014
• Docket: 2014-UP-188
• Status: Unpublished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

Patricia A. Frierson, Appellant,

v.

Kimberly S. Clark, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2012-213278

Appeal From Richland County G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-188 Submitted January 1, 2014 – Filed May 7, 2014

AFFIRMED

Patricia A. Frierson, of Columbia, pro se.

Stephen L. Hudson, of Law Offices of Stephen L. Hudson, PC, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Plum Creek Dev. Co. v. City of Conway, 334 S.C. 30, 34, 512 S.E.2d 106, 109 (1999) ("Res judicata bars subsequent actions by the same parties when the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence that was the subject of a prior action between those parties."); Plott v. Justin Enters., 374 S.C. 504, 511, 649 S.E.2d 92, 95 (Ct. App. 2007) ("Res judicata requires three elements be met: 1) a final, valid judgment on the merits; 2) identity of parties; and 3) the second action must involve matters properly included in the first suit.").

AFFIRMED.1

FEW, C.J., and PIEPER and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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