Sheila E. v. Tiffany D.

CourtListener 10142932Scctapp11.07.2007

Gesamter Gesetzestext

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

Sheila E. and Frank E., Respondents,

v.

Tiffany D., Daniel  B., Brian  E. and other persons unknown claiming to be the father of Cody  B., being as a class designated as John Doe, and minor Cody B. under the age of 18 years; DOB 2/13/05, Defendants, of whom Tiffany D. and Daniel B. are Appellants.

Appeal From Pickens County

 Alvin D. Johnson, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.   2007-UP-352

Submitted July 2, 2007 – Filed July 11, 2007

AFFIRMED

Michael Anthony Andrews and Brian K. James, both of Easley, for Appellants Tiffany D. and Daniel B.

Steven Luther Alexander, of Pickens, for Respondents.

Ann Shipman Miner, of Pickens, for Guardian Ad Litem.

PER CURIAM: This appeal arises from the termination of parental rights (TPR) of Tiffany D., Daniel B., Brian E., and any other putative father of Child.  The family court found Tiffany D. and the putative fathers failed to visit or support Child for an excess of six months.  Additionally, the family court found TPR to be in Child’s best interest.  After a thorough review of the record pursuant to Ex Parte Cauthen, 291 S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we affirm[1] the family court’s ruling and grant counsels’ petitions to be relieved.

AFFIRMED.

ANDERSON, HUFF, and BEATTY, JJ., concur.

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

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.