Loyer v. S17 Owners Association ( 2015 )

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
Bernard Loyer, Jr. and Sherry Loyer, Respondents,
v.
S17 Owners Association, Inc.; John L. Avent; Frances
Avent; Sylvia S. Berger; Robert J. Berning; Jeanne M.
Clavel; Greg Connell; Gerald Crawford; Bruce C.
Douglas; Jonathan D. Dunn; Les Galazka; Michael V.
Goransky; Frank L. Gougher; David E. Harris; Cathryn
A. Knight; John H. Lacher; Kyle R. Larson; Laura Linn;
Roger McCoig; Charles Wilmot Miller; Michael O'Brien;
Carolyn M. Rischbieter; William Satcher; and Belinda
Smith-Sullivan, Defendants,
Of Whom S17 Owners Association, Inc.; John L. Avent;
Frances Avent; Sylvia S. Berger; Greg Connell; Jonathan
D. Dunn; Michael V. Goransky; Frank L. Gougher;
David E. Harris; Cathryn A. Knight; John H. Lacher;
Kyle R. Larson; Michael O'Brien; Carolyn M.
Rischbieter; and Belinda Smith-Sullivan are Appellants,
And of Whom Charles Wilmot Miller is a Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2014-001742
Appeal From Edgefield County
Kathy Ouzts Rushton, Special Referee
Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-469
Submitted August 1, 2015 – Filed October 7, 2015
AFFIRMED
Philip Herman Woolhiser, of Woolhiser, Inc., of Aiken,
for Appellants.
Bernard Loyer, Jr., of Trenton, pro se.
Sherry Loyer, of Trenton, pro se.
Paul Knapp Simons, Jr., of Hull Barrett, PC, of Aiken,
for Respondent Charles Wilmot Miller.
PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal a special referee's order and judgment of
foreclosure and sale. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the
following authorities: Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 315, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599 (Ct.
App. 2005) ("It is well-settled 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." (internal quotation marks omitted)); Wilder Corp.
v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("[A]n objection must be
sufficiently specific to inform the trial court of the point being urged by the
objector.").
AFFIRMED.1
FEW, C.J., and KONDUROS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.