McIntosh v. McIntosh

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

Steve McIntosh, Appellant,

v.

Kay Hatley
McIntosh, Respondent.

Appeal From Horry County

Wylie H. Caldwell, Jr., Family Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2012-UP-156 

Submitted February 1, 2012 – Filed March
7, 2012

AFFIRMED

Steve McIntosh, of Oak Island, pro se.

Kay Hatley McIntosh, of Pawley's Island, pro se.

PER CURIAM:  Steve McIntosh (Husband) appeals the
family court's order requiring him to pay Kay Hatley McIntosh $1,000.00 per
month in permanent periodic alimony.  Husband argues the family court erred in
determining he was capable of earning income in addition to his social security
benefits.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Rule 210(h),
SCACR ("[T]he appellate court will not consider any fact which does not
appear in the Record on Appeal."); Smith v. Smith, 386 S.C. 251,
266, 687 S.E.2d 720, 728 (Ct. App. 2009) (noting that "the appealing party
has the burden of providing a sufficient record" for appellate review). 

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS,
THOMAS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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