Gilmer v. Lee

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: June 27, 2007
• Docket: 2007-UP-334
• Status: Unpublished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 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Vivian Lorraine Gilmer, Respondent,

v.

Larry Charles Lee, Appellant.

---

Appeal From Jasper County
 Robert S. Armstrong, Family Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No.  2007-UP-334
Submitted June 1, 2007 – Filed June 27, 2007

---

AFFIRMED

---

James H. Moss, of Beaufort, for Appellant. 

Darrell Thomas Johnson, Jr., Warren Paul Johnson and Mills L. Morrison, Jr., all of Hardeeville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Larry Charles Lee appeals the family court’s order accepting the appraisal value of the marital home at $170,000. 

We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities:  In re McCracken, 346 S.C. 87, 92, 551 S.E.2d 235, 238 (2001) (stating that issues raised in a brief but not supported by argument are deemed abandoned and will not be considered on appeal); Murphy v. Murphy, 319 S.C. 324, 329, 461 S.E.2d 39, 41-42 (1995) (“Family court judges have wide discretion in determining how marital property is to be distributed.  They may use any reasonable means to divide property equitably, and their judgment will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.”); Engle v. Engle, 343 S.C. 444, 448, 539 S.E.2d 712, 714 (Ct. App. 2000) (citations omitted) (holding that on appeal from family court, this Court may find facts in accordance with its own view of the preponderance of the evidence; however, this does not mean that we should disregard the findings of the family court judge who was in a better position to see and hear the witnesses.)

AFFIRMED.[1]

STILWELL, SHORT, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

---

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