Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2004-UP-221 - Grate v. Bone

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Joseph N. Grate,        Appellant,

v.

Helen Bone,        Respondent.


Appeal From Horry County
John  L.  Breeden, Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2004-UP-221
Submitted January 29, 2004 – Filed March 30, 2004


AFFIRMED


Joseph N. Grate, for Appellant.

Arrigo Paul Carotti, of Conway, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Joseph Grate filed a complaint against Helen Bone, a court reporter, concerning a transcript for a hearing.  Grate appeals from the circuit court’s order dismissing his complaint. We affirm. [1]

FACTS

Grate sued Bone for failing to deliver a transcript to him, alleging Bone obstructed his access to due process, deprived him of speedy access to justice, obstructed justice, and concealed evidence. 

Bone moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the complaint failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action in that the complaint failed to allege that Grate paid Bone for the transcript.  The court granted Bone’s motion.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

“In deciding whether the circuit court properly granted the motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP, this court must consider whether the complaint, when viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, states any valid claim for relief.” Slack v. James, 356 S.C. 479, 482, 589 S.E.2d 772, 773 (Ct. App. 2003).  The circuit court should not grant a motion to dismiss if “facts alleged and inferences reasonably deducible therefrom would entitle the plaintiff to any relief on any theory of the case.” Gentry v. Yonce, 337 S.C. 1, 5, 522 S.E.2d 137, 139 (1999) (quoting Stiles v. Onorato, 318 S.C. 297, 300, 457 S.E.2d 601, 602 (1995)). 

LAW/ANALYSIS

Grate argues the circuit court erred in granting Bone’s motion to dismiss.  We disagree.

Grate’s complaint simply alleges that Grate requested a transcript from Bone and Bone failed to deliver the transcript to him.  Her failure to provide a transcript when there has been no allegation of payment for the transcript does not entitle Grate to relief on any theory of the case. [2]   Because Grate has failed to state facts sufficient to constitute any legally cognizable cause of action against Bone, the circuit court properly granted Bone’s motion to dismiss.

AFFIRMED.

GOOLSBY, HOWARD, and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.


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

[2] “Where a transcript of the proceeding must be prepared by the court reporter, appellant shall, within the time provided for ordering the transcript, make satisfactory arrangements (including agreement regarding payment for the transcript), in writing with the court reporter for furnishing the transcript.” Rule 207 SCACR.