Rose v. Rose

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: November 9, 2016
• Docket: 2016-UP-452
• Status: Unpublished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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Paula Rose, Respondent,

v.

Charles Homer Rose, III, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2015-000701

Appeal From Spartanburg County R. Keith Kelly, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2016-UP-452 Submitted September 1, 2016 – Filed November 9, 2016

AFFIRMED

Kim R. Varner, of Varner & Segura, and J. Falkner Wilkes, both of Greenville, for Appellant.

Charles J. Hodge and Timothy Ryan Langley, of Hodge & Langley Law Firm, PC; and Christopher David Kennedy and N. Douglas Brannon, of Kennedy & Brannon, P.A., all of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Roberson v. S. Fin. of S.C., Inc., 365 S.C. 6, 9, 615 S.E.2d 112, 114 (2005) ("The decision whether to set aside an entry of default or a default judgment lies solely within the sound discretion of the [circuit court]."); id. ("The [circuit] court's decision will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear showing of an abuse of that discretion."); id. ("An abuse of discretion in setting aside a default judgment occurs when the [court] issuing the order was controlled by some error of law or when the order, based upon factual, as distinguished from legal conclusions, is without evidentiary support." (quoting In re Estate of Weeks, 329 S.C. 251, 259, 495 S.E.2d 454, 459 (Ct. App. 1997))).

AFFIRMED.1

LOCKEMY, C.J., and SHORT, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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