Opinion
2021-UP-307 Appellate Case 2021-000250
08-24-2021
South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Tia O'Connor and Jose Hilario Sacayon Garcia, Defendants, Of whom Tia O'Connor is the Appellant. In the interest of a minor under the age of eighteen.
Heather Vry Scalzo, of Byford & Scalzo, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant. Rosemerry Felder-Commander, of the South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Laurens, for Respondent. Marcus Wesley Meetze, of Law Office of Marcus W. Meetze, LLC, of Simpsonville, for the 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 August 16, 2021
Appeal From Laurens County Matthew P. Turner, Family Court Judge
Heather Vry Scalzo, of Byford & Scalzo, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant.
Rosemerry Felder-Commander, of the South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Laurens, for Respondent.
Marcus Wesley Meetze, of Law Office of Marcus W. Meetze, LLC, of Simpsonville, for the Guardian ad Litem.
PER CURIAM
Tia O'Connor appeals the family court's order allowing the Department of Social Services (DSS) to retain custody of her minor child and authorizing DSS to forego reasonable efforts at reunification. See S.C. Code § 63-7-1700(D) (Supp. 2020) (setting forth situations in which the family court may return a child to a parent's home following removal); S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-1640(C) (Supp. 2020) (setting forth situations in which the family court may authorize DSS to forego reasonable efforts at family reunification). 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 and relieve O'Connor's counsel.
See also S.C. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Downer, SC Sup. Ct. Order dated Feb. 2, 2005 (expanding the Cauthen procedure to situations when "an indigent person appeals from an order imposing other measures short of termination of parental rights").
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
LOCKEMY, C.J., and WILLIAMS and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.