Bettencourt v. Wald ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • 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
    Deena L. and Scott Bettencourt, Appellants,
    v.
    Mary Ruth Wald, Respondent.
    Appellate Case No. 2011-204086
    Appeal From Greenville County
    Robin B. Stilwell, Circuit Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-175
    Submitted March 1, 2014 – Filed April 23, 2014
    AFFIRMED
    Robert Clyde Childs, III, of Childs Law Firm; Robert
    Charles Ray, of Robert C. Ray & Associates; and J.
    Falkner Wilkes, all of Greenville, for Appellants.
    Marcus Kirk McGarr, of Marcus K. McGarr, PA, of
    Greenville, for Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
    authorities:
    1. As to whether the trial court erred by failing to award all attorney's fees and
    expenses pursuant to Rule 37(c), SCRCP, due to Wald's denial of the Bettencourts'
    first request to admit: Sessions v. Withers, 
    327 S.C. 409
    , 416, 
    488 S.E.2d 888
    , 892
    (Ct. App. 1997) ("The award of expenses under Rule 37(c)[, SCRCP,] is a matter
    left to the sound discretion of the trial court, and the court's decision will not be
    reversed on appeal absent an abuse of that discretion."); 
    id.
     (noting an appellate
    court may find an abuse of discretion if "the appellant shows that the conclusion
    reached by the trial court was without reasonable factual support").
    2. As to whether the trial court erred by failing to award attorney's fees and
    expenses pursuant to Rule 37(c), SCRCP, due to Wald's denial of the Bettencourts'
    remaining requests to admit: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 
    330 S.C. 71
    , 76, 
    497 S.E.2d 731
    , 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on
    appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court] to be
    preserved for appellate review.").
    AFFIRMED.1
    FEW, C.J., and SHORT and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
    1
    We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2014-UP-175

Filed Date: 4/23/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/22/2024