Opinion
2020-UP-296
10-28-2020
South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Maranda Wright, Daniel King, and Steven Sherman, Defendants, Of whom Steven Sherman is the Appellant and Maranda Wright and Daniel King are Respondents. In the interest of minors under the age of eighteen. Appellate Case No. 2020-000213
Kimberly Yancey Brooks, of Kimberly Y. Brooks, Attorney at Law, of Greenville, for Appellant. Andrew Troy Potter, of Anderson, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services. Robert Mills Ariail, Jr., of The Law Office of R. Mills Ariail, Jr., of Greenville, for Respondent Maranda Wright. Mary Elizabeth Parrilla, of The Parrilla Law Firm, LLC, of Anderson, for Respondent Daniel King. Kimberly Welchel Pease, of Kimberly R. Welchel, Attorney at Law, of Seneca, 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 October 23, 2020
Appeal From Oconee County Edgar H. Long, Jr., Family Court Judge.
Kimberly Yancey Brooks, of Kimberly Y. Brooks, Attorney at Law, of Greenville, for Appellant.
Andrew Troy Potter, of Anderson, for Respondent South Carolina Department of Social Services.
Robert Mills Ariail, Jr., of The Law Office of R. Mills Ariail, Jr., of Greenville, for Respondent Maranda Wright.
Mary Elizabeth Parrilla, of The Parrilla Law Firm, LLC, of Anderson, for Respondent Daniel King.
Kimberly Welchel Pease, of Kimberly R. Welchel, Attorney at Law, of Seneca, for the Guardian ad Litem.
PER CURIAM.
Steven Sherman appeals the family court's final order terminating his parental rights to his minor children. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570 (Supp. 2019). 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 Sherman's counsel.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
THOMAS, HILL, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.