Babb v. Noble

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

Mac Babb, Respondent,

v.

Katherine L. Noble, a/k/a Bonnie C. Noble, Appellant.

Appeal From Horry County

 James R. Barber, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2007-UP-493

Submitted October 1, 2007 – Filed October
16, 2007

APPEAL DISMISSED

William M. Bruner, of Myrtle Beach, for Appellant.

Mac Babb, of Little River, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM[1]: Noble’s
Statement of Issues on Appeal and her Argument do not coincide.  Moreover, the
arguments in the body of her brief were not included in the Statement of Issues
on Appeal, and are cursory in their own right.  Accordingly, we dismiss this
appeal based on the following authorities: Rule 208(b)(1)(B), SCACR, (requiring
appellants to provide the court with “[a] statement of each of the issues
presented for review” and cautioning appellants the appellate court ordinarily
will not consider any point which is not set forth in the statement of issues
on appeal); Fields v. Monroe Ltd. P’ship, 312 S.C. 102, 106, 439 S.E.2d
283, 285 (Ct. App. 1993) (“An issue raised on appeal but not argued in the
brief is deemed abandoned.”); and First Sav. Bank v. McLean, 314 S.C.
361, 363 444 S.E.2d 513, 515 (1994) (stating an issue is abandoned where the
appellant fails to provide argument or supporting authority).

Accordingly, this appeal is

DISMISSED.

STILWELL,
SHORT, and WILLIAMS JJ., concur.

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