Knight v. Trundy

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

Mildred C.
Knight and Bobby Knight, III, Appellants,

v.

Sean K. Trundy,
Keith I. McCarty, Amanda & Roy Maybank, Pratt-Thomas Epting & Walker,
& Maybank, LLC as Law Firms, Respondents.

Appeal From Charleston County

J. C. Buddy Nicholson, Jr., Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-057

Submitted February 1, 2011 – Filed
February 15, 2011

AFFIRMED

Mildred C. Knight and Bobby Knight, III, pro se, of North
Charleston, for Appellants.

Andrew W. Countryman, Dawes Cook, and Roy Pearce Maybank, all of
Charleston, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM:  Mildred C.
Knight and Bobby Knight, III, pro se, appeal the granting of Sean K. Trundy's,
I. Keith McCarty's, Roy Maybank's, Amanda Maybank's, Pratt-Thomas, Epting and
Walker Law Firm's, and Maybank Law Firm's motion to dismiss Knight's legal
malpractice and civil conspiracy complaint.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR and the following authorities: Rule 12(b)(6),
SCRCP (stating a complaint is to be dismissed for failure to state facts
sufficient to constitute a cause of action); S.C. Code Ann. § 15-36-100(B)
(Supp. 2010) ("[P]laintiff must file as part of the complaint an affidavit
of an expert witness who must specify at least one negligent act or omission
claimed to exist and the factual basis for each claim . . . ."); S.C. Code
Ann. § 15-36-100(C)(1) (Supp. 2010) (stating that upon defendant's motion to
dismiss, a professional negligence claim should be dismissed for failure to
submit such an affidavit). 

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, SHORT, and PIEPER, JJ., concur.

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