Gardner v. Gladney

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS

PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Elouise Gardner, Appellant,

v.

Letitia Gladney, Respondent.

Appeal From Richland County

 Berry L. Mobley, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2005-UP-564

Submitted October 3, 2005 – Filed October 25,2005   

AFFIRMED

William W. Wheeler, III, of Bishopville, for Appellant.

John D. Elliott, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Elouise Gardner appeals from the family court’s denial of her request for visitation with her two grandsons.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR, and the following authorities:  S.C. Code Ann. § 20-7-420 (33) (Supp. 2004) (stating the family court has jurisdiction to order visitation for grandparents “upon a written finding that the visitation rights would be in the best interests of the child and would not interfere with the parent/child relationship”); Camburn v. Smith, 355 S.C. 574, 580, 586 S.E.2d 565, 568 (2003) (stating that where a parent is fit, before visitation can be awarded to a grandparent over the parent’s objection “there must be evidence of compelling circumstances to overcome the presumption that the parental decision is in the child’s best interests”). 

AFFIRMED.

ANDERSON, HUFF, and WILLIAMS, JJ., concur.

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