Langley v. Bowers

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Herman E. Langley,       
Appellant,

v.

Keisha Bowers, Barbara Privette, Donnie Bowers and Tommie Jo Bowers,       
Respondents.

Appeal From Lancaster County

Paul E. Short, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-294

Submitted February 20, 2003 - Filed
April 30, 2003 

AFFIRMED

Mr. Herman E. Langley, of Bennettsville; for Appellant.

Mr. Donnie Bowers, Ms. Keisha
Bowers, and Ms. Tommie Jo Bowers, all of Virginia Beach; Ms. Barbara Privette,
of Lancaster; for Respondents.

PER CURIAM:  Herman E. Langley appeals
from a decision by the circuit court judge that a deed signed by Langley was
not procured through fraud.  Langley frames the single issue in this case as
follows:  “Does the Judge’s ruling within this case have probative value as
a matter of South Carolina Laws and Statutes?”  We affirm [1] pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR,
and the following authorities:  Humbert v. State, 345 S.C. 332, 548 S.E.2d
862 (2001) (requiring an issue to raised to and ruled upon by the trial court
before the issue will be considered on appeal); Mutual Sav. & Loan Assoc.
v. McKenzie, 274 S.C. 630, 632-33, 266 S.E.2d 423, 425 (1980) (placing the
burden on the moving party to establish all nine elements of fraud); Coleman
v. Daniel, 261 S.C. 198, 202, 199 S.E.2d 76 (1973) (stating this court can
make its own findings of fact in cases of equity); Smith v. McClam, 280
S.C. 398, 399, 312 S.E.2d 260, 261 (Ct. App. 1984) (stating an action to set
aside a deed sounds in equity).

AFFIRMED.

HEARN, C.J., CURETON and GOOLSBY,
JJ., concur.

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