Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
2011-UP-071 - Walter Mortgage Company v. Green

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

Walter Mortgage Company, Respondent,

v.

Natasha L. Green and Shilon L. Green, Appellants.


Appeal From Chester County
William O. Spencer, Jr., Special Referee


Unpublished Opinion No.   2011-UP-071
Submitted January 4, 2011 – Filed February 23, 2011


AFFIRMED


Natasha Green and Shilon Green, pro se, of McBee, for Appellants.

J. Kershaw Spong, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  In this foreclosure action, Natasha and Shilon Green appeal a special referee's grant of summary judgment to Walter Mortgage Company.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Dep't of Transp. v. First Carolina Corp. of S.C., 372 S.C. 295, 301, 641 S.E.2d 903, 907 (2007) ("'[A]n 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.'" (quoting Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998))); Helms Realty, Inc. v. Gibson-Wall Co., 363 S.C. 334, 339, 611 S.E.2d 485, 487-88 (2005) ("Appellant[s] ha[ve] the burden of providing a sufficient record."); Cowburn v. Leventis, 366 S.C. 20, 41, 619 S.E.2d 437, 448 (Ct. App. 2005) ("When a trial court makes a general ruling on an issue, but does not address the specific argument raised by a party, that party must make a Rule 59(e) motion asking the trial court to rule on the issue in order to preserve it for appeal.").

AFFIRMED.

HUFF and LOCKEMY, JJ., and GOOLSBY, A.J., concur.


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