Matrix Capital Bank v. Brooks

Opinion

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Matrix Capital Bank,        Respondent,

v.

Earl Brooks a/k/a Earl Lawrence Brooks, Jr.; and Travelers Mortgage Services, Inc., Defendants,/Of whom Earl Brooks a/k/a Earl Lawrence Brooks, Jr., is,        Appellant.

---

Appeal From Orangeburg County
Olin  D. Burgdorf, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-047
Submitted November 19, 2003 – Filed January 21, 2004

---

AFFIRMED

---

Mr. Earl Brooks, of Columbia, for Appellant.

John J. Hearn, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Earl Brooks, a/k/a Earl Lawrence Brooks, Jr. appeals the master-in-equity’s judgment of foreclosure and sale.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR and the following authorities:  Register v. Dukes, 302 S.C. 195, 197, 394 S.E.2d 718, 720 (Ct. App. 1990) (stating that because the trial judge did not address the issue of a motion for a continuance, there is no way for this court to determine whether he abused his discretion in failing to grant one); First Union Nat’l Bank v. Soden, 333 S.C. 554, 568, 511 S.E.2d 372, 379 (Ct. App. 1998) (holding where the trial court did not address the issue, and the appellant did not make a motion for the court to do so pursuant to Rule 59, SCRCP, the issue is not preserved for appellate review); Rule 210, SCACR (stating the Record on Appeal shall not include any matter which was not presented to the lower court and "the appellate court will not consider any fact which does not appear in the Record on Appeal.”); Crestwood Golf Club, Inc. v. Potter, 328 S.C. 201, 215, 493 S.E.2d 826, 834 (1997) (stating the appellant has the burden of providing court with sufficient record on which to make a decision); Glasscock, Inc. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 348 S.C. 76, 81, 557 S.E.2d 689, 691 (Ct. App. 2001) (stating short, conclusory arguments unsupported by authority are deemed abandoned). 

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, STILWELL, and BEATTY, JJ., concur.