SCDSS v. Marshall ( 2018 )

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.
Faith Marshall, Isaac Hasson, Klayee Juty, and Travis
Shields, Defendants,
Of Whom Faith Marshall is the Appellant.
In the interest of minors under the age of eighteen.
Appellate Case No. 2016-000923
Appeal From Greenville County
Robert N. Jenkins, Sr., Family Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-004
Submitted December 5, 2017 – Filed January 5, 2018
AFFIRMED
John Brandt Rucker and Allyson Sue Rucker, of The
Rucker Law Firm, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant.
Andrew Troy Potter, of Anderson, for Respondent.
Robert A. Clark, of Greenville, for the Guardian ad
Litem.
PER CURIAM: Faith Marshall (Mother) appeals the family court's termination of
her parental rights (TPR) to four of her minor children (Children), arguing the
family court erred by finding TPR was in Children's best interest. We affirm
pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Dep't of Soc.
Servs. v. Jennifer M., 404 S.C. 269, 276, 744 S.E.2d 591, 595 (Ct. App. 2013) ("In
appeals from the family court, an appellate court reviews factual and legal issues
de novo."); id. at 277, 744 S.E.2d at 595 ("[However], de novo review does not
relieve an appellant of [her] burden to 'demonstrate error in the family court's
findings of fact.'" (quoting Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 392, 709 S.E.2d 650, 655
(2011))); id. ("Consequently, the family court's factual findings will be affirmed
unless appellant satisfies this court that the preponderance of the evidence is
against the finding of the [family] court." (alteration in original) (quoting Lewis,
392 S.C. at 392, 709 S.E.2d at 655)); Doe v. Baby Boy Roe, 353 S.C. 576, 579, 578
S.E.2d 733, 735 (Ct. App. 2003) ("In a [TPR] case, the best interests of the
children are the paramount consideration."); id. at 581, 578 S.E.2d at 736 ("TPR
statutes must be liberally construed in order to ensure prompt judicial procedures
for freeing minor children from the custody and control of their parents by
terminating the parent-child relationship.").
AFFIRMED.1
WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.