Moats Construction, Inc. v. City Council of the City of Anderson

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
Moats Construction, Inc, Appellant,
v.
City Council of the City of Anderson, Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2021-000285
Appeal From Anderson County
R. Scott Sprouse, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2023-UP-124
Submitted March 15, 2023 – Filed March 29, 2023
AFFIRMED
Thomas Jefferson Goodwyn, Jr., of Goodwyn Law Firm,
LLC, and Coy David Beale, Jr., of Samuels Reynolds
Law Firm LLC, both of Columbia, for Appellant.
Stacey Todd Coffee, of Logan & Jolly, LLP, and J.
Franklin McClain, of City Attorney's Office, Anderson,
both of Anderson, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Moats Construction, Inc., appeals the circuit court's dismissal of
its appeal of a decision by the City Council of the City of Anderson (the City)
regarding a procurement matter for failure to file the appeal in a timely manner.
On appeal to this court, Moats argues the City failed to provide notice of its
decision directly to Moats and thus violated the South Carolina Rules of Civil
Procedure and Moats's due process right to be heard. However, in its notice of
appeal to the circuit court, Moats expressly acknowledged receiving written notice
of the entry of the City's decision on March 23, 2020, and its attorney stated at the
hearing on the City's motion to dismiss that Moats "was sent a letter that we were
cc'd on back in March." Furthermore, as Moats acknowledged in its brief to this
court, its appeal to the circuit court was filed in September 2020, more than six
months after notification of the City's decision. Therefore, we affirm the circuit
court's dismissal of Moats's appeal pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the
following authorities: Rule 74, SCRCP (stating a notice of appeal to the circuit
court from the judgment of an inferior court or decision of an administrative
agency or tribunal "must be served on all parties within thirty . . . days after receipt
of written notice of the judgment, order[,] or decision appealed from"); id.
(requiring a notice of appeal to the circuit court to "be filed with the clerk of the
court to which the appeal is taken and with the inferior court or administrative
agency or tribunal within the time provided . . . by this rule when no time is fixed
by statute[] for service of the notice of intention to appeal"); Brown v. S.C. Dep't of
Health & Env't Control, 348 S.C. 507, 519, 560 S.E.2d 410, 417 (2002) (stating
the circuit court "sits as an appellate court" when it reviews the final decision of an
administrative agency); Town of Hilton Head Island v. Godwin, 370 S.C. 221, 223,
634 S.E.2d 59, 60 (Ct. App. 2006) ("[An] appellate court must always take notice
of the lack of . . . jurisdiction to [decide an appeal.]"); id. at 224, 634 S.E.2d at 61
("A party who fails to timely appeal or take any other timely action necessary to
correct an error is procedurally barred from contesting the validity of the
[challenged ruling].").
AFFIRMED. 1
THOMAS, MCDONALD, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.
1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.