Opinion
2024-UP-092 Appellate Case 2023-000269
03-21-2024
South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Skylee Pinckney, Michael Major, and Brian Welton, Defendants. Intervening Parties: Catherine and Jonathan Leeke and Catherine Wylly Leeke and Jonathan Scott Leeke, Respondents, v. Skylee Pinckney, Michael Major, Brian Welton and South Carolina Department of Social Services, Defendants. Of whom Skylee Pinckney is the Appellant. In the interests of minors under the age of eighteen.
John Brandt Rucker and Alyson Sue Rucker, both of The Rucker Law Firm, of Greenville, and Kirkley Gibson White, of Copeland, Stair, Valz & Lovell, LLP, of Charleston, all for Appellant. James Fletcher Thompson, of Thompson Dove Law Group LLC, of Spartanburg, for Respondents Catherine Wylly Leeke and Johnathan Scott Leeke. Stacey L. Kaufman, of Summerville, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services. Riley Augustus Bradham, of Bradham Law Firm, of Charleston, for Guardian ad Litem Shateque Hacker. Tina W. Dixon, of North Charleston, as Guardian ad Litem.
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.
Submitted March 13, 2024
Appeal From Colleton County Deborah A. Malphrus, Family Court Judge
John Brandt Rucker and Alyson Sue Rucker, both of The Rucker Law Firm, of Greenville, and Kirkley Gibson White, of Copeland, Stair, Valz & Lovell, LLP, of Charleston, all for Appellant.
James Fletcher Thompson, of Thompson Dove Law Group LLC, of Spartanburg, for Respondents Catherine Wylly Leeke and Johnathan Scott Leeke.
Stacey L. Kaufman, of Summerville, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services.
Riley Augustus Bradham, of Bradham Law Firm, of Charleston, for Guardian ad Litem Shateque Hacker.
Tina W. Dixon, of North Charleston, as Guardian ad Litem.
PER CURIAM
Skylee Pinckney appeals the family court's final order terminating her parental rights to her two minor children. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570 (Supp. 2023). 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 warrant briefing. Accordingly, we affirm the family court's ruling.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
GEATHERS, HEWITT, and VINSON, JJ., concur.