Carolina Refrigeration v. Leitzsey

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

Carolina Refrigeration Services, Respondent,

v.

Claude L. Leitzsey, Sr., Claude L. Leitzsey, Jr., Lisa M.
Leitzsey and Branch Banking and Trust Company,
Defendants,

Of Whom Claude L. Leitzsey, Sr., Claude L. Leitzsey,
Jr., and Lisa M. Leitzsey are Appellants.

Appellate Case No. 2013-000002

Appeal From Lexington County
R. Knox McMahon, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-359
Heard September 10, 2014 – Filed October 15, 2014

AFFIRMED

Gerald D. Jowers, of Columbia, for Appellants.

Jean Perrin Derrick, of Lexington, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: In this appeal from the foreclosure of a mechanic's lien, Claude
L. Leitzsey, Sr., Claude L. Leitzsey, Jr., and Lisa M. Leitzsey argue the circuit
court erred in granting a default judgment against them pursuant to Rule 55,
SCRCP, for failing to answer Carolina Refrigeration Services' summons and
complaint. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Harbor Island Owners' Ass'n v. Preferred Island Props., Inc., 369 S.C.
540, 544, 633 S.E.2d 497, 499 (2006) (holding the decision whether to set aside an
entry of default or a default judgment lies solely within the sound discretion of the
circuit court); Mitchell Supply Co. v. Gaffney, 297 S.C. 160, 163, 375 S.E.2d 321,
323 (Ct. App. 1988) (holding the circuit court's decision will not be disturbed on
appeal absent a clear showing of an abuse of that discretion); In re Estate of Weeks,
329 S.C. 251, 259, 495 S.E.2d 454, 459 (Ct. App. 1997) (holding an abuse of
discretion occurs when the judgment is controlled by some error of law or when
the order, based upon factual, as distinguished from legal conclusions, is without
evidentiary support).

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and THOMAS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.