Earp v. Perritte

Full title: Bobbie Earp, Respondent, v. Sean Perritte, Appellant.

Court: STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: Nov 7, 2012

Appellate Case No. 2011-204626 (S.C. Ct. App. Nov. 7, 2012)

Opinion

Appellate Case No. 2011-204626 Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-605

11-07-2012

Bobbie Earp, Respondent, v. Sean Perritte, Appellant.

Merrill A. Cox, of Cox Law Firm, of Goose Creek, for Appellant. Bobbie Earp, pro se, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM

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.

Appeal From Berkeley County

Jack A. Landis, Family Court Judge

AFFIRMED

Merrill A. Cox, of Cox Law Firm, of Goose Creek, for

Appellant.

Bobbie Earp, pro se, for Respondent. PER CURIAM : Sean Perritte appeals the family court's denial of his motion in reference to bankruptcy. Perritte argues an automatic stay in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy bars the continuation of an order of incarceration for civil contempt for failure to pay child support. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: King v. King, 384 S.C. 134, 142, 681 S.E.2d 609, 614 (Ct. App. 2009) (holding issues must be raised to and ruled upon by the family court to be preserved for appellate review); Bodkin v. Bodkin, 388 S.C. 203, 219, 694 S.E.2d 230, 239 (Ct. App. 2010) (holding when the family court fails to rule on an issue presented, the issue must be raised in a Rule 59(e), SCRCP, motion to be preserved for review). AFFIRMED.¹

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

SHORT, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.