Watson Finance Co. v. Fisher

Court of Appeals of South Carolina·Decided May 16, 2012·No. 2012-UP-306·Unpublished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

Watson Finance Co. Inc., Appellant,

v.

Sue M. Fisher, Respondent.


Appeal From Greenville County
G. Edward Welmaker, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-306
Submitted May 1, 2012 – Filed May 16, 2012   


AFFIRMED


Kenneth E. Sowell, of Anderson, for Appellant.

Rodney M. Brown, of Fountain Inn, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Watson Finance Company (Company) appeals the circuit court's order, arguing the circuit court erred in affirming the magistrate's order directing a verdict in favor of Fisher because the magistrate improperly excluded Company's testimony regarding the price of a repair bill.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Butler v. Edgefield, 328 S.C. 238, 248, 493 S.E.2d 838, 843 (1997) (holding the circuit court, acting as an appellate court in a case heard by the magistrate, cannot consider questions that have not been presented to the magistrate); Taylor v. Medenica, 324 S.C 200, 216, 479 S.E.2d 35, 43 (1996) (holding a party may not argue one ground at trial and an alternate ground on appeal).

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and LOCKEMY, 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

Watson Finance Co. v. Fisher, (S.C. Ct. App. 2012).

Watson Finance Co. v. Fisher (Watson Finance Co. v. Fisher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Butler v. Town of Edgefield
493 S.E.2d 838 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1997)
Taylor v. Medenica
479 S.E.2d 35 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1996)