CourtListener 10153650•Lindsey, Roy v. SCDC
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
Roy Lindsey, Appellant,
v.
South Carolina
Department of Corrections, Respondent.
Appeal From Administrative Law Court
Ralph K. Anderson, III, Administrative Law
Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-474
Submitted October 1, 2010 Filed October
28, 2010
AFFIRMED
Roy Lindsey, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Christopher D. Florian, of Columbia, for
Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Roy Lindsey appeals the Administrative
Law Court's dismissal of his appeal regarding the loss of his good time credits
after a disciplinary conviction. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and
the following authorities: Rule 220(c),
SCACR ("The appellate court may affirm any ruling, order, decision or
judgment upon any ground(s) appearing in the Record on Appeal."); Plum
Creek Dev. Co. v. City of Conway, 334 S.C. 30, 34, 512 S.E.2d 106,
109 (1999) ("Res judicata bars subsequent actions by the same
parties when the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence that
was the subject of a prior action between those parties.").
AFFIRMED.
FEW, C.J.,
SHORT and WILLIAMS, 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.