Johnson v. Milliken

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

Curtis Johnson, Appellant,

v.

Deering Milliken, Inc., Employer, and Liberty Mutual
Ins. Co., Carrier, Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2011-193488

Appeal From Union County
John C. Hayes, III, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2013-UP-025
Submitted December 3, 2012 – Filed January 16, 2013

AFFIRMED

Curtis Johnson, of Hartford, CT, pro se.

Jason Alexander Griggs, of Willson Jones Carter &
Baxley, P.A., of Greenville, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 42-17-60 (1976) ("[E]ither party to the dispute may,
within thirty days from the date of such award or within thirty days after receipt of
notice to be sent by registered mail of such award, but not thereafter, appeal from
the decision of the [Appellate Panel of the Workers' Compensation Commission
(Appellate Panel)] to the court of common pleas of the county in which the alleged
accident happened, or in which the employer resides or has his principal office, for
errors of law under the same terms and conditions as govern appeals in ordinary
civil actions."); Skinner v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 380 S.C. 91, 96-97, 668
S.E.2d 795, 797 (2008) (noting the deadline for filing a notice of appeal with the
circuit court pursuant to section 42-17-60 is thirty days); Rule 74, SCRCP ("Notice
of appeal to the circuit court must be served on all parties within thirty (30) days
after receipt of written notice of the judgment, order or decision appealed from.");
Gattis v. Murrells Inlet VFW No. 10420, 353 S.C. 100, 109, 576 S.E.2d 191, 195
(Ct. App. 2003) ("If the parties to the dispute fail to timely appeal the final award
of the [Appellate Panel], then its order 'is conclusive and binding as to all questions
of fact.'" (citation omitted)).

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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