Opinion
Appellate Case No. 2017-001574 Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-234
08-12-2020
JK Trading, Inc., Appellant, v. Karl & Sasha, Inc., Respondent.
Trace M. Dillon, of The Dillon Law Firm, PC, of Buford, Georgia, for Appellant. Tucker S. Player, of Player Law Firm, LLC, of Columbia, for Respondent.
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 Richland County
Robert E. Hood, Circuit Court Judge
AFFIRMED
Trace M. Dillon, of The Dillon Law Firm, PC, of Buford, Georgia, for Appellant. Tucker S. Player, of Player Law Firm, LLC, of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: JK Trading Inc. (JK Trading) appeals the trial court's order finding in favor of Karl & Sasha Inc. (Karl & Sasha). On appeal, JK Trading argues the trial court erred because Karl & Sasha failed to introduce any evidence to contradict JK Trading's testimony and evidence presented at trial. We find Karl & Sasha's cross-examination of JK Trading's Chief Financial Officer and the 2 exhibits it introduced at trial were sufficient to contradict JK Trading's allegation that Karl & Sasha owed a balance of $57,809.01. Because the trial court did not err in finding in favor of Karl & Sasha, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Temple v. Tec-Fab, Inc., 381 S.C. 597, 599-600, 675 S.E.2d 414, 415 (2009) ("In an action at law tried without a jury, an appellate court's scope of review extends merely to the correction of errors of law."); Harleysville Grp. Ins. v. Heritage Communities, Inc., 420 S.C. 321, 333, 803 S.E.2d 288, 294 (2017) ("[T]he appellate court will not disturb the trial court's findings of fact unless there is no evidence to reasonably support them." (quoting Auto Owners Ins. Co., Inc. v. Newman, 385 S.C. 187, 191, 684 S.E.2d 541, 543 (2009))); Bivens v. Watkins, 313 S.C. 228, 235, 437 S.E.2d 132, 136 (Ct. App. 1993) ("The judging of the credibility of witnesses and the weighing of evidence in a law case are uniquely functions of the trial court, not the appellate court."). AFFIRMED. HUFF, THOMAS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.