Maness v. SCDMH ( 2012 )

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
Terry Maness, Michael Miller, Michael Davis and Rufus
Belding, Plaintiffs,
Of Whom Rufus Belding is Appellant,
v.
South Carolina Department of Mental Health,
Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2008-104850
Appeal From Richland County
G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-483
Submitted April 2, 2012 – Filed August 8, 2012
DISMISSED
Rufus Belding, pro se, for Appellant.
Sheally Venus Poe, of Smith Poe, P.A., of Simpsonville,
for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Rufus Belding filed suit against the South Carolina
Department of Mental Health (Department) because the Department charged
him for third-party medical care relating to his heart attack. Belding appeals
the circuit court's grant of summary judgment to the Department, arguing the
trial court erred in applying statutes from Title 44, Chapters 22 and 23, to him
and in failing to require the Department to pay his third-party medical bills.
We dismiss this appeal as moot pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the
following authorities: Sloan v. Greenville Cnty., 380 S.C. 528, 535, 670
S.E.2d 663, 667 (Ct. App. 2009) ("An appellate court . . . will not adjudicate
a matter when no actual controversy capable of specific relief exists. A case
becomes moot when judgment, if rendered, will have no practical legal effect
upon the existing controversy. Mootness also arises when some event occurs
making it impossible for the reviewing court to grant effectual relief."
(internal citations omitted)); S.C. State Highway Dep't v. McKeown Food
Store No. 9, 254 S.C. 180, 183, 174 S.E.2d 342, 343 (1970) (holding a
voluntary settlement agreement renders an action moot).
DISMISSED.
FEW, C.J., PIEPER, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.