Brook S. v. Baby S. ( 2009 )

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

Brook S., Appellant,

v.

In re: Baby S., an Unborn Child, Respondent.

---

Appeal From Richland County
John M. Rucker, Family Court Judge

---

Unpublished Opinion No.  2009-UP-299
Submitted June 1, 2009 – Filed June 8, 2009
Withdrawn, Substituted and Refiled August 25, 2009

---

Affirmed

---

Jan L. Warner, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Victoria L. Eslinger, Manton M. Grier, Jr., all of Columbia, for Respondent.

W. Jones Andrews, III, of Columbia, for Guardian Ad Litem.

PER CURIAM:  Brook S. appeals the family court's order refusing to reopen and set aside the 2002 adoption of her biological son.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. §§ 63-9-750(C), -760 (2008) (a final adoption decree controls the legal rights as between the biological parents, adoptive parents, and the adopted child); § 63-9-60(A)(1)(e) (an order of special circumstances is issued for the purpose of allowing a child to be placed out-of-state for adoption where "there are unusual or exceptional circumstances such that the best interests of the child would be served by placement with or adoption by nonresidents of [South Carolina]"); § 63-9-780(B) ("No person may have access to the records except for good cause shown by order of the judge of the court in which the decree of adoption was entered."); Rule 220(c), SCACR (providing this court "may affirm any ruling, order, decision or judgment upon any ground(s) appearing in the Record on Appeal").

Affirmed.

Hearn, C.J., Cureton, A.J., and Goolsby, A.J., concur

---

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.