From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wedlake v. Edwards

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Jun 8, 2022
No. 2022-UP-248 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 8, 2022)

Opinion

2022-UP-248 Appellate Case 2020-000438

06-08-2022

Raymond A. Wedlake, as a Member of Woodington Homeowners' Association, Inc., Appellant, v. Christopher Edwards, Charles Koshis, Denis Esteve, Michael Keels and William Craigo in their capacity as Board of Directors of Woodington Homeowners' Association, Inc., Respondents.

Raymond A. Wedlake, of Greenville, pro se. Emily Kate O'Brian, of Campbell Teague LLC, of Greenville, for Respondents.


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 May 12, 2022

Appeal From Greenville County Robin B. Stilwell, Circuit Court Judge

Raymond A. Wedlake, of Greenville, pro se.

Emily Kate O'Brian, of Campbell Teague LLC, of Greenville, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM

Raymond A. Wedlake appeals the circuit court's order granting summary judgment to Respondents and the circuit court's subsequent denial of his Rule 59(e), SCRCP, motion. On appeal, Wedlake argues six issues related to the merits of the summary judgment order.

On October 28, 2019, following a hearing, the circuit court orally granted Respondents' motion for summary judgment. On November 18, 2019, Wedlake filed a motion for a new hearing. We hold the circuit court effectively ruled on Wedlake's motion for a new hearing by the issuance of its subsequent written order granting Respondents' motion for summary judgment on November 25, 2019. This is further supported by (1) Wedlake's acknowledgment in his appellate brief that the circuit court's law clerk was aware of his motion for a new hearing prior to the court's issuance of its written motion and (2) the circuit court's clarification in a subsequent order: "[T]o the extent that any party may contend that [Wedlake's] Motion for a New Hearing filed November 18, 2019, is still pending, the same is denied." Further, the circuit court properly found Wedlake had not timely filed his subsequent Rule 59(e) motion after the issuance of the court's written order. Based on the foregoing, we hold there is no further issue properly before this court and affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Rule 59(e) ("A motion to alter or amend the judgment shall be served not later than 10 days after receipt of written notice of the entry of the order."); Elam v. S.C. Dep't of Transp., 361 S.C. 9, 15, 602 S.E.2d 772, 775 (2004) ("A timely post-trial motion, including a motion to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e), SCRCP, stays the time for an appeal for all parties until receipt of written notice of entry of the order granting or denying such motion.").

AFFIRMED.

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

THOMAS, MCDONALD, and HEWITT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Wedlake v. Edwards

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
Jun 8, 2022
No. 2022-UP-248 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 8, 2022)
Case details for

Wedlake v. Edwards

Case Details

Full title:Raymond A. Wedlake, as a Member of Woodington Homeowners' Association…

Court:Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Date published: Jun 8, 2022

Citations

No. 2022-UP-248 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 8, 2022)