Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2006-UP-412 - K & K v. E & C Williams Mechanical & Welding

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

K & K, a Limited Partnership, Respondent,

v.

E & C Williams Mechanical & Welding, Incorporated, Appellant.


Appeal From Dorchester County
Patrick R. Watts, Master In Equity


Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-412
Submitted December 1, 2006 – Filed December 15, 2006   


AFFIRMED


Steven L. Smith, of Charleston, for Appellant

Jennifer L. Queen, of Summerville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  E&C Williams Mechanical and Welding Incorporated filed a notice of appeal of the master in equity’s order in which the master substituted Charles A. Williams, individually and doing business as E & C Williams Mechanical and Welding, as the defendant and held Williams individually liable for unpaid rent, late fees, attorney’s fees, and costs in the amount of $40,886.73.  We affirm [1] pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR, and the following authorities:  Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) (“It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review.”); Bakala v. Bakala, 352 S.C. 612, 625, 576 S.E.2d 156, 163 (2003) (“A due process claim raised for the first time on appeal is not preserved.”); Godfrey v. Heller, 311 S.C. 516, 520, 429 S.E.2d 859, 862 (Ct. App. 1993) (stating where an appellant learns for the first time when the appellant receives the order that the respondent would be granted certain relief, the appellant must move, pursuant to Rule 59(e), SCRCP, to alter or amend the judgment to preserve the issue);  Harkins v. Greenville County, 340 S.C. 606, 616, 533 S.E.2d 886, 891 (2000) (stating the appellant has the burden of presenting an adequate record on appeal).

AFFIRMED.

ANDERSON, HUFF and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.


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