Opinion
2024-UP-026 Appellate Case 2023-000958
01-17-2024
South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Amber Raper, Dakota Vanover, John Hill, and Eric Brown, Defendants, Of whom Dakota Vanover is the Appellant and Amber Raper, John Hill, and Eric Brown are Respondents. In the interest of minors under the age of eighteen.
Jennifer Lynn Mook, of Law Office of Jennifer Mook, LLC, of Aiken, for Appellant. Matthew Niemiec, of The Law Offices of Matthew R. Niemiec, LLC, of Lake Wylie, for Respondent John Hill. Brandi Lekita Small and Wendy Marlenea Bowen, both of Columbia, for Respondent Amber Raper. Larita Yusuf, of Gastonia, North Carolina, for Respondent Eric Brown. R. Chadwick Smith, of South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Rock Hill, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services. Justin Montgomery, of Sumter, 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 January 8, 2024
Appeal From York County David G. Guyton, Family Court Judge
Jennifer Lynn Mook, of Law Office of Jennifer Mook, LLC, of Aiken, for Appellant.
Matthew Niemiec, of The Law Offices of Matthew R. Niemiec, LLC, of Lake Wylie, for Respondent John Hill.
Brandi Lekita Small and Wendy Marlenea Bowen, both of Columbia, for Respondent Amber Raper.
Larita Yusuf, of Gastonia, North Carolina, for Respondent Eric Brown.
R. Chadwick Smith, of South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Rock Hill, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services.
Justin Montgomery, of Sumter, for the Guardian ad Litem.
PER CURIAM
Dakota Vanover appeals the family court's final order terminating his parental rights to his minor children. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570 (Supp. 2023). 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.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
MCDONALD and VINSON, JJ., and LOCKEMY, A.J., concur.