Rosamond Enterprises, Inc. v. McGranahan

299 S.E.2d 337, 278 S.C. 512, 1983 S.C. LEXIS 220
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedJanuary 6, 1983
Docket21848
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 299 S.E.2d 337 (Rosamond Enterprises, Inc. v. McGranahan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rosamond Enterprises, Inc. v. McGranahan, 299 S.E.2d 337, 278 S.C. 512, 1983 S.C. LEXIS 220 (S.C. 1983).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

This is an appeal from a jury verdict of $52,700.00 in an action to foreclose on a mechanic’s lien.

The respondent company, Rosamond Enterprises, Inc., contracted to build a house for appellants on a cost-plus basis. Prior to completion of the job, Alvin Rosamond, company president, died. His wife and son took over the business, completed construction on the house, and demanded payment. Having paid the company $46,500.00, appellants refused to pay an additional amount allegedly due.

During trial, the company record book, kept by Mrs. Rosa-mond, was admitted into evidence over appellants’ objection under the business records hearsay exception. Mrs. Rosamond was allowed to testify concerning the contents of a notation therein which had been made by her husband indicating the amount due on appellants’ contract.

*513 Appellants now contend the record book should not have been admitted into evidence without removal of the deceased’s notation. Counsel’s objection to the admissibility of the record book was based upon another ground and does not preserve this question for appeal. Beck v. Gibson, 268 S. C. 627, 235 S. E. (2d) 716 (1977).

At one point counsel indicated an objection to questions concerning the writing itself, but later expressly withdrew that objection. Shortly thereafter, he failed to object when Mrs. Rosamond was allowed to publish the contents of the writing. Any objection to that testimony cannot be raised for the first time on review, nor can it be heard on appeal when it is not properly raised by an exception. Murphy v. Hagan, 275 S. C. 334, 271 S. E. (2d) 311 (1980).

Because the only issue briefed on appeal is not properly before this Court, we dismiss the appeal.

Dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. King
784 S.E.2d 252 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2016)
South Carolina Department of Social Services v. Sarah W.
741 S.E.2d 739 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2013)
Ligon v. Norris
640 S.E.2d 467 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2006)
Hanahan v. Simpson
485 S.E.2d 903 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1997)
Roberts v. Roberts
384 S.E.2d 719 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1989)
Enoree Baptist Church v. Fletcher
340 S.E.2d 546 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1986)
Bartles v. Livingston
319 S.E.2d 707 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1984)
Southeastern Mobile Homes, Inc. v. Walicki
317 S.E.2d 773 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1984)
Arnold v. Yarborough
316 S.E.2d 416 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1984)
South Carolina Law Enforcement Division v. Michael & Lance
315 S.E.2d 171 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1984)
Windham v. Honeycutt
302 S.E.2d 856 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1983)
Bridwell v. Bridwell
302 S.E.2d 856 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
299 S.E.2d 337, 278 S.C. 512, 1983 S.C. LEXIS 220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosamond-enterprises-inc-v-mcgranahan-sc-1983.