Estate of Weinberg v. Laubshire

Full title: The Estate of Phoebe Weinberg, Respondent, v. Robert Laubshire, Appellant.

Court: THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 11, 2011

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-448 (S.C. Ct. App. Oct. 11, 2011)

Opinion

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-448

10-11-2011

The Estate of Phoebe Weinberg, Respondent, v. Robert Laubshire, Appellant.

Robert Laubshire, pro se, for Appellant. C. Rauch Wise, of Greenwood, for Respondent.

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 Anderson County

R. Lawton McIntosh, Circuit Court Judge

AFFIRMED

Robert Laubshire, pro se, for Appellant.

C. Rauch Wise, of Greenwood, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM : Robert Laubshire appeals the circuit court's denial of his motion to vacate the registration of a foreign judgment against him, arguing the circuit court erred in not determining whether the ten-year enforcement period for the execution of a foreign judgment had expired. We affirm¹ pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: Chastain v. Hiltabidle, 381 S.C. 508, 515, 673 S.E.2d 826, 829 (Ct. App. 2009) ("When an issue is raised to but not ruled upon by the [circuit] court, the issue is preserved for appeal only if the party raises the same issue in a Rule 59(e) motion.").

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

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.