Segarra v. Farm Bureau Insurance

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: February 22, 2012
• Docket: 2012-UP-090
• Status: Unpublished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

---

Julio Angel Segarra, Appellant,

v.

Farm Bureau Insurance Company, Respondent.

---

Appeal From Florence County
Thomas A. Russo, Circuit Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No.  2012-UP-090
Heard January 25, 2012 – Filed February 22, 2012 

---

AFFIRMED

---

Patrick James McLaughlin, of Florence, for Appellant.

Robert Charles Brown, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  In this contract and tort action arising from an underlying motor vehicle accident, Julio Segarra (Segarra) appeals the circuit court's order granting Farm Bureau Insurance Company's (Farm Bureau)[1] motions for judgment on the pleadings and summary judgment pursuant to Rule 12(c), SCRCP, and Rule 56, SCRCP, respectively.  Segarra contends the circuit court erred in finding the doctrines of collateral estoppel and/or res judicata bar him from pursuing causes of action for breach of contract and bad faith against Farm Bureau because the circuit court's previously unappealed ruling dismissing his action is not the law of the case.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to whether the circuit court erred in dismissing Segarra's breach of contract and bad faith causes of action: See Judy v. Martin, 381 S.C. 455, 458, 674 S.E.2d 151, 153 (2009) ("Appellant may not seek relief from the prior unappealed order of the circuit court because the order has become the law of the case.  Under the law of the case doctrine, a party is precluded from relitigating, after an appeal, matters that were either not raised on appeal, but should have been, or raised on appeal, but expressly rejected by the appellate court."); Hudson v. Lancaster Convalescent Ctr., 393 S.C. 1, 7, 709 S.E.2d 65, 68 (Ct. App. 2011) (stating a circuit court ruling that is appealed but subsequently withdrawn is the law of the case); see also Buckner v. Preferred Mut. Ins. Co., 255 S.C. 159, 160-61, 177 S.E.2d 544, 544 (1970) (holding an unappealed ruling, right or wrong, is the law of the case).

2.  Because we have affirmed the circuit court's ruling that the previously unappealed order is the law of the case, we need not address Segarra's remaining arguments.  See Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc., 335 S.C. 598, 613, 518 S.E.2d 591, 598 (1999) (stating an appellate court need not address remaining issues when a decision on a prior issue is dispositive).

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS and GEATHERS, JJ., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

---

[1] To clarify, South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company is improperly designated as Farm Bureau Insurance Company in Segarra's complaint and in the record on appeal.