From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chisholm v. Juarez

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Mar 9, 2022
No. 2022-UP-098 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 9, 2022)

Opinion

2022-UP-098 Appellate Case 2019-001750

03-09-2022

William B. Chisholm, Appellant, v. Guadalupe Juarez, Respondent.

William B. Chisholm, of Greenville, pro se. Guadalupe Juarez, of Fountain Inn, pro se.


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 February 1, 2022

Appeal From Greenville County Edward W. Miller, Circuit Court Judge.

William B. Chisholm, of Greenville, pro se.

Guadalupe Juarez, of Fountain Inn, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

William B. Chisholm appeals an order from the circuit court affirming the ruling of the magistrate court. On appeal, Chisholm argues (1) "Did [the circuit court] err in thinking that the transcript of the case [it] was given would be the same as that given to [Chisholm]" and (2) "Did [Chisholm] err in believing that the record of transcript he was given was real?" Because Chisholm did not provide arguments or supporting authority for his issues, these issues are deemed abandoned. Accordingly, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authority: First Sav. Bank v. McLean, 314 S.C. 361, 363, 444 S.E.2d 513, 514 (1994) (stating an argument is deemed abandoned on appeal when the appellant fails to provide arguments or supporting authority).

AFFIRMED.

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

THOMAS, MCDONALD, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Chisholm v. Juarez

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Mar 9, 2022
No. 2022-UP-098 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 9, 2022)
Case details for

Chisholm v. Juarez

Case Details

Full title:William B. Chisholm, Appellant, v. Guadalupe Juarez, Respondent.

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Mar 9, 2022

Citations

No. 2022-UP-098 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 9, 2022)