Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2009-UP-538 - Hess v. Norton

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.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

David L. Hess and Ceferina G. Hess, Appellants,

v.

Janice C. Norton, James C. Daniel, and Russell M. Lawrence, Defendants,

Of whom Russell M. Lawrence is Respondent.


Appeal From Greenwood County
 J. Cordell Maddox, Jr., Circuit Court Judge


Unpublished Opinion No. 2009-UP-538
Submitted November 2, 2009 – Filed November 19, 2009   


AFFIRMED


David L. Hess and Ceferina G. Hess, pro se, of Greenwood, for Appellants.

Thomas E. Hite, Jr., of Abbeville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  David L. Hess and Ceferina G. Hess (the Hesses)  appeal the trial court's dismissal of their suit against Russell M. Lawrence.  The Hesses argue: (1) there is clear and convincing evidence proving they were conveyed a right of way to the alleyway; (2) their suit is not barred by the applicable statute of limitations; (3) their suit is not frivolous and is based on a valid claim to use of the alleyway; (4) the survey plan of the property should be considered as the legal basis of their claim; (5) the Defendants should be compelled to oust the present possessor of the alleyway; (6) the contention that they have failed to prosecute the case is without merit.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authority:  S.C. Dep't of Transp. v. First Carolina Corp. of S.C., 372 S.C. 295, 301-02, 641 S.E.2d 903, 907 (2007) (holding 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).      

AFFIRMED.[1]

WILLIAMS, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur. 


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