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
On Time Transportation, Inc., Respondent,
SC Workers' Compensation Uninsured Employer's Fund, Appellant.
Appeal From Spartanburg County
J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-581
Heard December 7, 2011 – Filed December 20, 2011
Amy V. Cofield, of Lexington, for Appellant.
Duke K. McCall, Jr., of Greenville, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: This appeal arises out of a declaratory judgment action filed by Respondent On Time Transportation Inc. (On Time Transportation). Appellant South Carolina Workers' Compensation Uninsured Employer's Fund (the Fund) appeals the circuit court's finding that the lien filed by the Fund against On Time Transportation is null and void. On appeal, the Fund argues: (1) the issues presented in the declaratory judgment hearing were previously adjudicated in an unappealed ruling by a workers' compensation commissioner; (2) the issues decided by the single commissioner are the law of the case; and (3) the issue of whether On Time Transportation was an employer under section 40-68-70(E) of the South Carolina Code (2011) was raised for the first time in the declaratory judgment action. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Elam v. S.C. Dep't of Transp., 361 S.C. 9, 23, 602 S.E.2d 772, 779–80 (2004) ("Issues and arguments are preserved for appellate review only when they are raised to and ruled on by the lower court."); RRR, Inc. v. Toggas, 378 S.C. 174, 185, 662 S.E.2d 438, 443 (Ct. App. 2008) (noting a party cannot raise an issue for the first time on appeal); Germain v. Nichol, 278 S.C. 508, 509, 299 S.E.2d 335, 335 (1983) ("Appellant has the burden of providing this Court with a sufficient record upon which this Court can make its decision.").
HUFF, PIEPER, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.