Hugh Parks Prices v. Sara Filler

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Hugh Parks Prices v. Sara Filler

DecidedFebruary 25, 2026

Docket2023-001032

StatusUnpublished

This text of Hugh Parks Prices v. Sara Filler (Hugh Parks Prices v. Sara Filler) 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

Hugh Parks Prices v. Sara Filler, (S.C. Ct. App. 2026).

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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Hugh Parks Price, Appellant,

v.

Sara Filler, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2023-001032

Appeal From Saluda County Debra R. McCaslin, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2026-UP-085 Submitted January 2, 2026 – Filed February 25, 2026

AFFIRMED

Rolf Mouin Baghdady, of Rolf M. Baghdady, P.A., of Chapin, for Appellant.

William E. Booth, III, of Booth Law Firm, LLC, of West Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Hugh Parks Price appeals the circuit court's order affirming the magistrate court's judgment in favor of Sara Filler in a claim and delivery action concerning livestock. On appeal, Price argues (1) the circuit court erred in affirming the magistrate court because the due process clause required that a recording of the magistrate's proceedings be made available to him, and (2) he did not receive the recording prior to the hearing. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.

We hold these issues are not preserved for appellate review because they were not raised to or ruled upon by the circuit court. Specifically, Price did not object to participating in the hearing without the transcript, nor did he assert his due process rights were violated by proceeding without the transcript. See 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 [circuit court] to be preserved for appellate review."); Rule 75, SCRCP ("Appeals to the circuit court shall be made upon the original record in the lower court or administrative agency or tribunal.").

AFFIRMED.1

WILLIAMS, C.J., and THOMAS and CURTIS, JJ., concur.

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

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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Hugh Parks Price, Appellant,

v.

Sara Filler, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2023-001032

Appeal From Saluda County Debra R. McCaslin, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2026-UP-085 Submitted January 2, 2026 – Filed February 25, 2026

AFFIRMED

Rolf Mouin Baghdady, of Rolf M. Baghdady, P.A., of Chapin, for Appellant.

William E. Booth, III, of Booth Law Firm, LLC, of West Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Hugh Parks Price appeals the circuit court's order affirming the magistrate court's judgment in favor of Sara Filler in a claim and delivery action concerning livestock. On appeal, Price argues (1) the circuit court erred in affirming the magistrate court because the due process clause required that a recording of the magistrate's proceedings be made available to him, and (2) he did not receive the recording prior to the hearing. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.

We hold these issues are not preserved for appellate review because they were not raised to or ruled upon by the circuit court. Specifically, Price did not object to participating in the hearing without the transcript, nor did he assert his due process rights were violated by proceeding without the transcript. See 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 [circuit court] to be preserved for appellate review."); Rule 75, SCRCP ("Appeals to the circuit court shall be made upon the original record in the lower court or administrative agency or tribunal.").

AFFIRMED.1

WILLIAMS, C.J., and THOMAS and CURTIS, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hugh Parks Prices v. Sara Filler, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hugh-parks-prices-v-sara-filler-scctapp-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack