SC Farm Bureau v. Smith, Gerald

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

South Carolina
Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, Respondent,

v.

Gerald J. Smith
and Patsy Smith as Guardian and Mother In the interest of: T.T., L.T., and G.T., Appellants.

Appeal From Saluda County

William P. Keesley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2010-UP-274

Submitted May 3, 2010 – Filed May 19, 2010

AFFIRMED

Harry L. Goldberg and William R. Padget, both
of Columbia, for Appellants.

Carey M. Ayer, of Lexington, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Gerald and Patsy Smith (Insured) appeal
the circuit court's order declaring they are not entitled to underinsured
motorist coverage for a June 7, 2002 accident because they failed to renew
their automobile policy with South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance
Company (Farm Bureau).  On appeal, Insured argue the circuit court erred in
finding Farm Bureau mailed its renewal terms and statement of premium.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Auto Owners
Ins. Co. v. Newman, 385 S.C. 187, 191, 684 S.E.2d 541, 543 (2009)
(explaining in a declaratory judgment action when the purpose of the underlying
dispute is to determine whether coverage exists under an insurance policy, the
action is one at law, and this court will not disturb the circuit court's
findings of fact unless there is no evidence to reasonably support them); S.C.
Code Ann. § 38-75-750(d)(1) (2002) (stating an insurer may satisfy its obligation to furnish
renewal terms and statement of premium by "mailing or delivering renewal
terms and statement to the insured at his address shown in the policy or, if
not reflected therein, at his last known address, not less than thirty days
prior to expiration or anniversary").

AFFIRMED.

GEATHERS and
LOCKEMY, JJ., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

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