Biondo v. Russell

CourtListener 10148679Scctapp12.11.2014

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 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

Michael Biondo, Appellant,

v.

Crystal Russell, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2013-001055

Appeal From Berkeley County
A. E. Morehead, III, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-394
Submitted September 1, 2014 – Filed November 12, 2014

AFFIRMED

Michael Biondo, of Goose Creek, pro se.

H. Stanley Feldman, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Michael Biondo appeals the family court's order dismissing his
action for grandparent visitation of a minor child. On appeal, Biondo argues: (1)
the family court erred in finding it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate
his claim; (2) the family court erred in awarding attorney's fees; (3) he is entitled to
the protections of the South Carolina Whistleblower Act; and (4) the family court
should be reversed due to Crystal Russell's failure to file a respondent's brief. We
affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1. As to issue one: S.C. Code Ann. § 63-3-530(A)(33) (Supp. 2013) ("The family
court has exclusive jurisdiction . . . to order visitation for the grandparent of a
minor child where either or both parents of the minor child is or are deceased, or
are divorced, or are living separate and apart in different habitats . . . ." (emphasis
provided)).

2. As to issues two and three: Gartside v. Gartside, 383 S.C. 35, 43, 677 S.E.2d
621, 625 (Ct. App. 2009) ("But for a very few exceptional circumstances, an
appellate court cannot address an issue unless it was raised to and ruled upon by
the family court.").

3. As to issue four: Rule 208(a)(4), SCACR ("Upon the failure of respondent to
timely file a brief, the appellate court may take such action as it deems proper.").

AFFIRMED.1

FEW, C.J., and THOMAS and LOCKEMY, 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.