Brook S. v. Baby S.

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

Brook S., Appellant,

v.

In re: Baby S.,
an Unborn Child, Respondent.

Appeal From Richland County

John M. Rucker, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2009-UP-299

Submitted June 1, 2009 – Filed June 8,
2009

Withdrawn, Substituted and Refiled August
25, 2009

Affirmed

Jan L. Warner, of Columbia, for Appellant.

Victoria L. Eslinger, Manton M. Grier, Jr.,
all of Columbia, for Respondent.

W. Jones Andrews, III, of Columbia, for Guardian Ad Litem.

PER CURIAM:  Brook S. appeals the family court's order
refusing to reopen and set aside the 2002 adoption of her biological son.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following
authorities: S.C. Code Ann. §§ 63-9-750(C), -760 (2008) (a final
adoption decree controls the legal rights as between the biological parents,
adoptive parents, and the adopted child); § 63-9-60(A)(1)(e) (an order of
special circumstances is issued for the purpose of allowing a child to be
placed out-of-state for adoption where "there
are unusual or exceptional circumstances such that the best interests of the
child would be served by placement with or adoption by nonresidents of [South
Carolina]"); § 63-9-780(B) ("No person may have access to the
records except for good cause shown by order of the judge of the court in which
the decree of adoption was entered."); Rule 220(c), SCACR (providing this
court "may affirm any ruling, order, decision or judgment upon any
ground(s) appearing in the Record on Appeal").

Affirmed.

Hearn, C.J., Cureton,
A.J., and Goolsby, A.J., concur

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