S.C. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Amber M.

Full title: South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Amber M.…

Court: STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: May 9, 2013

Appellate Case No. 2012-213709 (S.C. Ct. App. May. 9, 2013)

Opinion

Appellate Case No. 2012-213709 Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-193

05-09-2013

South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Amber M., William M., and John Doe, Defendants, Of whom William M. is the Appellant, In the interest of minor children under the age of eighteen.

Raymond Talmage Wooten, of Smith, Jordan, Lavery & Lee, P.A., of Easley, for Appellant. Patti Beverly Brady, of the South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Pickens, for Respondent. Steven Luther Alexander, of the Alexander Law Firm, of Pickens, for Guardian ad Litem.

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 Pickens County

W. Marsh Robertson, Family Court Judge

AFFIRMED

Raymond Talmage Wooten, of Smith, Jordan, Lavery & Lee, P.A., of Easley, for Appellant.

Patti Beverly Brady, of the South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Pickens, for Respondent.

Steven Luther Alexander, of the Alexander Law Firm, of Pickens, for Guardian ad Litem. PER CURIAM : William M. appeals from the family court's final order terminating his parental rights to his minor children. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570 (2010 & Supp. 2012). Upon a thorough review of the record and the family court's findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Ex parte Cauthen, 291 S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we find no meritorious issues that warrant briefing. Accordingly, we affirm the family court's ruling. AFFIRMED.¹

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

SHORT, THOMAS, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.