Widdicombe v. Dupree

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL
VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH
CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Robert Widdicombe,       
Respondent,

v.

Rachel P.
Dupree,        Appellant.

Appeal From Charleston County

Paul W. Garfinkel, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.
2005-UP-490

Submitted August 1, 2005 – Filed August 17, 2005 

AFFIRMED

Rachel P. Tucker-Cales, of
Mt. Pleasant, for Appellant.

Paul B. Ferrara, III, of
Summerville, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Rachel P.
Tucker-Cales Dupree disputes a family court order finding her in contempt for
failing to pay child support.  We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(2), SCACR,
and the following authorities:  Haselden v. Haselden, 347 S.C. 48,
63, 552 S.E.2d 329, 337 (Ct. App. 2001) (defining contempt); Smith-Cooper v.
Cooper, 344 S.C. 289, 300, 543 S.E.2d 271, 277 (Ct. App. 2001) (defining
willful conduct); and Henderson v. Henderson, 298 S.C. 190, 197, 379
S.E.2d 125, 129 (1989) (holding that a finding of contempt is within the sound
discretion of the family court judge).  We find the issue of subject matter
jurisdiction not properly before this court because it is the subject of another
appeal currently pending before this court.  

AFFIRMED.[1]

ANDERSON, HUFF, and WILLIAMS, JJ.,
concur.   

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