From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grate v. Cohen

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Mar 22, 2023
No. 2023-UP-118 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2023)

Opinion

2023-UP-118 Appellate Case 2021-000449

03-22-2023

Joseph N. Grate, Appellant, v. Jameka Cohen, Respondent.

Joseph N. Grate, of Pawley's Island, pro se. Jameka Cohen, of Pawley's Island, 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 March 1, 2023

Appeal From Georgetown County Benjamin H. Culbertson, Circuit Court Judge

Joseph N. Grate, of Pawley's Island, pro se.

Jameka Cohen, of Pawley's Island, pro se.

PER CURIAM

Joseph N. Grate, pro se, appeals the circuit court's affirmance of the magistrate court's order ruling that Jameka Cohen satisfied Grate's complaint by providing her insurance information. On appeal, Grate argues (1) the magistrate court erred in ruling Cohen's response satisfied his complaint, (2) the circuit court erred in denying his motions for recusal and admission of best evidence, and (3) the court reporter erred by lying in the production of the transcript from his hearing in front of the circuit court. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.

1. We hold that Grate abandoned his argument that the magistrate court erred in ruling Cohen's production of her insurance information satisfied his complaint. See Glasscock, Inc. v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 348 S.C. 76, 81, 557 S.E.2d 689, 691 (Ct. App. 2001) ("[S]hort, conclusory statements made without supporting authority are deemed abandoned on appeal and therefore not presented for review."); State v. Colf, 332 S.C. 313, 322, 504 S.E.2d 360, 364 (Ct. App. 1998) (finding a conclusory, two-paragraph argument that cited no authority other than an evidentiary rule was abandoned), aff'd as modified on other grounds, 337 S.C. 622, 525 S.E.2d 246 (2000).

2.We hold Grate abandoned his arguments regarding the circuit court's denial of his motion for admission of best evidence and his motion for recusal because he made conclusory arguments, and he failed to cite authorities other than one evidentiary rule in relation to the admission of best evidence and one appellate court rule in relation to his motion to recuse. See Colf, 332 S.C. at 322, 504 S.E.2d at 364 (finding a conclusory, two-paragraph argument that cited no authority other than an evidentiary rule was abandoned).

3. We hold Grate's argument that the court reporter erred by lying in the production of the transcript of the circuit court hearing is not appropriate for direct appeal because Grate did not allege any errors by the circuit court and did not properly challenge the accuracy of the transcript provided by the court reporter. See Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 363, 527 S.E.2d 742, 747 (2000) ("In a direct appeal, the focus generally is upon the propriety of rulings made by the circuit court in response to a party's motions or objections."); Rule 607(i), SCACR (addressing retention of primary and backup tapes of a proceeding and the time for a party to challenge the accuracy of the transcript).

AFFIRMED.

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

WILLIAMS, C.J., VERDIN, J., and LOCKEMY, A.J., concur.


Summaries of

Grate v. Cohen

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Mar 22, 2023
No. 2023-UP-118 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2023)
Case details for

Grate v. Cohen

Case Details

Full title:Joseph N. Grate, Appellant, v. Jameka Cohen, Respondent.

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Mar 22, 2023

Citations

No. 2023-UP-118 (S.C. Ct. App. Mar. 22, 2023)