Kunst v. Parham
This text of Kunst v. Parham (Kunst v. Parham) 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.
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
J. Scott Kunst, Appellant,
v.
Mike Parham and Judy Parham, Respondents.
Appeal From Greenville County
Doyet A. Early, III, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-531
Submitted December 1, 2010 Filed
December 13, 2010
AFFIRMED
J. Scott Kunst, pro se, of Simpsonville, for Appellant.
Blake Smith, of Greenville, and Paul Zion, of Spartanburg, for Respondents.
PER CURIAM: J. Scott Kunst appeals the circuit court's grant
of summary judgment for his cause of action for defamation against Mike and
Judy Parham. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Hunt v. S.C.
Forestry Comm'n, 358 S.C. 564, 573, 595 S.E.2d 846, 851 (Ct. App.
2004) ("Issues raised in a brief but not supported by authority are deemed
abandoned and will not be considered on appeal."); see also In
re McCracken, 346 S.C. 87, 92, 551 S.E.2d 235, 238 (2001) ("A bald
assertion, without supporting argument, does not preserve an issue for
appeal.").
AFFIRMED.
THOMAS, PIEPER, AND GEATHERS, 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kunst v. Parham, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kunst-v-parham-scctapp-2010.