Rodgers v. Upstate Carolina Medical Center

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

Cora Jean
Rodgers, Appellant,

v.

Upstate Carolina
Medical Center and Helen Spencer, Respondents.

Appeal From Cherokee County

 J. Derham Cole, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-211

Submitted December 1, 2009 – Filed March
15, 2010   

AFFIRMED

Fletcher N. Smith, Jr., of Greenville, for Appellant.

William O. Sweeny, III, and Martin S. Driggers, Jr., both of
Columbia, for Respondents.

PER
CURIAM: Cora Jean Rodgers appeals the trial court's failure to grant her
directed verdicts on her medical negligence and medical battery causes of
action arising out of her treatment at Upstate Carolina Medical Center (Upstate
Carolina) after which she experienced a ruptured uterus and underwent a
hysterectomy.  She further appeals the trial court's failure to charge the jury
on the issues of negligence and medical abandonment.  Additionally, she appeals
the trial court's grant of Upstate Carolina's motion for a directed verdict on
her negligence cause of action.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and
the following authorities:

1.  As to whether the trial court erred in denying Rodgers a
directed verdict on her medical battery cause of action: Glasscock,
Inc. v. U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 348 S.C. 76, 81, 557 S.E.2d 689, 691 (Ct. App. 2001) ("[S]hort,
conclusory statements made without supporting authority are deemed abandoned on
appeal and therefore not presented for review."); see also Ellie,
Inc. v. Miccichi, 358 S.C. 78, 99, 594 S.E.2d 485, 496 (Ct. App. 2004) (holding
an issue is abandoned on appeal when it is not argued within the body of the
brief but is only a short, conclusory statement).

2.  As to whether the trial court erred in failing to charge
the jury on the issue of negligence: Glasscock, Inc., 348 S.C. at 81, 557 S.E.2d at 691
("[S]hort, conclusory statements made without supporting authority are
deemed abandoned on appeal and therefore not presented for review."); Sierra
v. Skelton, 307 S.C. 217, 224, 414 S.E.2d 169, 174 (Ct. App. 1992)
("[A] party may not assign as error the giving or failure to give an
instruction unless he objects before the jury retires to consider its verdict
by distinctly stating the matter to which he objects and the grounds for his
objection.").

3.  As to whether the trial court erred in granting Upstate Carolina's motion for a
directed verdict on the medical negligence cause of action: Glasscock, Inc.,
348 S.C. at 81, 557 S.E.2d at 691 ("[S]hort, conclusory statements made
without supporting authority are deemed abandoned on appeal and therefore not
presented for review.").

4.  As to whether the trial court erred in failing to grant Rodgers a
directed verdict on her medical negligence cause of action: Futch v.
McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc., 335 S.C. 598, 613, 518 S.E.2d 591,
598 (1999) (providing an appellate court need not review remaining issues when
its determination of a prior issue is dispositive of the appeal).

5.  As to whether the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on the issue
of medical abandonment: Greenville Mem'l Auditorium v. Martin, 301 S.C. 242, 246, 391 S.E.2d 546, 548
(1990) (holding an appellate court will not review the failure to give a
requested jury charge when the request to charge does not appear on the
record).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT,
THOMAS, and KONDUROS, JJ., concur.

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