Opinion
2019-UP-157
05-01-2019
Geary Thomas Dooly, of Spartanburg, pro se. Genevieve Speese Johnson and William Price Stork, both of Brock & Scott, PLLC, 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.
Submitted March 1, 2019
Appeal From Spartanburg County Gordon G. Cooper, Master-in-Equity
Geary Thomas Dooly, of Spartanburg, pro se.
Genevieve Speese Johnson and William Price Stork, both of Brock & Scott, PLLC, of Columbia, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM:
Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Judy v. Martin, 381 S.C. 455, 458, 674 S.E.2d 151, 153 (2009) ("Under the law-of-the-case doctrine, a party is precluded from relitigating, after an appeal, matters that were either not raised on appeal, but should have been, or raised on appeal, but expressly rejected by the appellate court."); Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review."); Potter v. Spartanburg Sch. Dist. 7, 395 S.C. 17, 24, 716 S.E.2d 123, 127 (Ct. App. 2011) ("An issue is deemed abandoned if the argument in the brief is not supported by authority or is only conclusory.").
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
LOCKEMY, C.J., and SHORT and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.