SCDSS v. Thomas Lockridge ( 2023 )

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
South Carolina Department of Social Services,
Respondent,
v.
Brooke Jackson and Thomas Lockridge, Defendants,
and
Kristel Malagon Torres Colbert and Nicholas Dean
Colbert, Intervenors/Respondents,
Of whom Thomas Lockridge is the Appellant,
and
Brooke Jackson is a Respondent.
In the interest of a minor under the age of eighteen.
Appellate Case No. 2023-000533
Appeal From York County
Kimaka Nichols-Graham, Family Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2023-UP-333
Submitted October 18, 2023 – Filed October 18, 2023
AFFIRMED
Melinda Inman Butler, of The Butler Law Firm, of
Union, for Appellant.
James Fletcher Thompson, of Thompson Dove Law
Group LLC, of Spartanburg, for Intervenors/
Respondents.
Matthew Niemiec, of The Law Offices of Matthew R.
Niemiec, LLC, of Lake Wylie, for Respondent Brooke
Jackson.
Andrew Troy Potter, of Anderson, for Respondent South
Carolina Department of Social Services.
Brett Aaron Lonadier, of Stewart Law Offices, LLC, of
Rock Hill, for the Guardian ad Litem.
PER CURIAM: Thomas Lockridge appeals the family court's final order
terminating his parental rights to his minor child. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570(Supp. 2022). Upon a thorough review of the record and the family court's
findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Ex parte Cauthen, 291 S.C.
465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we find no meritorious issues warrant briefing.
Accordingly, we affirm the family court's ruling and relieve Lockridge's counsel.
AFFIRMED. 1
THOMAS, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.