Essie Ruth Ford v. Ralph Kline

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

Essie Ruth Ford, Appellant,

v.

Ralph Kline, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2020-000061

Appeal From Horry County
Benjamin H. Culbertson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2022-UP-157
Submitted March 1, 2022 – Filed April 6, 2022

AFFIRMED

Bronte Marie Anelli, of S.C. Legal Services, of Conway,
for Appellant.

James Austin Thomas, of Grooms & Thomas, LLC, of
Myrtle Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Essie Ruth Ford appeals the circuit court's order granting Ralph
Kline's motion for a judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c), SCRCP.
On appeal, she argues the circuit court erred by relying on (1) pleadings outside of
the complaint and (2) extrinsic and contested evidence. We affirm pursuant to
Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330
S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be
raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by
the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review."); State v. Dunbar, 356 S.C.
138, 142, 587 S.E.2d 691, 694 (2003) ("A party may not argue one ground at trial
and an alternate ground on appeal.").

AFFIRMED.1

WILLIAMS, C.J., and KONDUROS and VINSON, JJ., concur.

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