Sabo v. Gaymon

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

Kathy Sabo, Appellant,

v.

Larry Gaymon, Respondent.

Appeal From Florence County

Haigh Porter, Special Referee

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-106

Submitted February 1, 2011 – Filed March
15, 2011   

AFFIRMED

Patrick J. McLaughlin, of Florence, for Appellant.

Charles J. Hupfer, Jr., of Florence, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Kathy
Sabo appeals the special referee's order denying her motion for attorney's fees
from her brother, Larry Gaymon, arising out of a partition action.  Sabo
contends the special referee erred (1) as a matter of law in finding she was
not able to recover attorney's fees under Rule 71(d)(3), SCRCP, because there
was no "common fund" and (2) by abusing its discretion in failing to
award her attorney's fees.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Laughon v.
O'Braitis, 360 S.C. 520, 529, 602 S.E.2d 108, 113 (Ct. App. 2004) ("The
determination of whether to award attorney's fees in partition actions rests
within the sound discretion of the trial court. The trial court may fix
attorneys' fees in all partition proceedings and, as may be equitable, assess
such fees against any or all of the parties in interest.") (citations and internal
quotation marks omitted); S&W Corp. of Inman v. Wells, 283 S.C. 218,
220, 321 S.E.2d 183, 185 (Ct. App. 1984) (holding that such a determination by
the circuit court will only be overturned by an appellate court upon a showing
of abuse of discretion).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J.,
KONDUROS, J., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

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