Trinity Investments, LLC v. Marina Ventures, Inc. and Pioneer Properties, Inc.

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

Trinity
Investments, LLC, Respondent,

v.

Marina
Ventures, Inc. and Pioneer Properties, Inc., Appellants.

Appeal From Georgetown County

 Benjamin H. Culbertson, Circuit Court
Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-587

Heard October 31, 2011 – Filed December
21, 2011

AFFIRMED

Franklin D. Beattie, Jr. and G. Turner Perrow, Jr., of Georgetown,
for Appellants.

Laura Mitchum Moyer and Robert Wade Maring, of Georgetown, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Marina Ventures, Inc. and Pioneer
Properties, Inc. appeal the appointment of a receiver to sell property in
satisfaction of a mortgage, arguing (1) the circuit court lacked subject matter
jurisdiction to appoint a receiver; (2) even if the circuit court had subject
matter jurisdiction, the appointment was improper; (3) laches and adverse adjudication
bar the appointment of a receiver; and (4) a presumption of payment arises from
the creditors' repeated abandonment of a foreclosure action.  We affirm
pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1.  As
to whether the circuit court had subject matter jurisdiction to appoint a receiver:
S.C. Code Ann. § 15-65-10(4) (2005) (providing the circuit
court may appoint a receiver "when a corporation has been dissolved, is insolvent,
or in imminent danger of insolvency . . ."); S.C. Code Ann. § 15-65-10(1) (2005) (providing the circuit court may appoint a
receiver before judgment when the applicant shows the property is in
"danger of being lost or materially injured or impaired" and the
applicant has a right to that property in the possession of an adverse party).  

2.  As to the
remaining issues: Jones v. Lott, 387 S.C. 339, 346, 692 S.E.2d 900, 903 (2010) (holding issues and
arguments are only preserved for review when they are raised to and ruled on by
the circuit court); S.C. Dep't of
Transp. v. First Carolina Corp. of S.C.,
372 S.C. 295, 301, 641 S.E.2d 903, 907 (2007) (holding issues not raised to and
ruled upon by the circuit court are not preserved for appellate review); S.C. Dep't of Transp. v. M & T Enter., 379 S.C. 645, 658-59, 667 S.E.2d 7, 15 (Ct. App.
2008) ("Without an initial ruling by the . . . [circuit] court, a
reviewing court simply would not be able to evaluate whether the . . .
[circuit] court committed error."); Knight
v. Waggoner, 359 S.C. 492, 496, 597 S.E.2d 894, 896 (Ct. App. 2004) (finding
arguments made for first time on appeal are not preserved for review).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT,
WILLIAMS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.