Geddis v. Geddis

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

Irving T. Geddis, Jr., Harry M. Carroll, Barbara C.
Stancil, & Joanne C. Wade, Respondents,

v.

Rebecca Geddis, Patricia Ann Geddis, Cleveland Geddis,
John Henry Geddis, Herman Geddis, George Geddis,
Patrice Geddis, Joenatham Geddis, Yvonne Geddis
Bowens, Gwendolyn P. Spell, Harry P. Geddis, Catherine
Goodwine a/k/a Catharine Goodwine, Jessie Goodwine,
and any individual who may be claiming an interest in
this action as an heir of these individuals, and MWV
Community Development and Land Management, LLC,
and John Doe and Jane Doe, ficticious names designating
the unknown heirs, devisees, distributees, issue,
executors, administrators, successors or assigns of the
Defendants named above, and Richard Roe and Mary
Roe, fictitious names designating infants and persons
under any disability or incompetent, including those
persons who might be in the Military Services within the
meaning of The Soldier's and Sailor's Civil Relief Act of
1941, Title 50, United States Code, and any other person
or legal entity who or which has or claims any right, title,
interest, or lien in or to the real property described in this
Complaint, Defendants,

Of whom Patrice Geddis is the Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2013-000608
Appeal From Dorchester County
Patrick R. Watts, Special Referee

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-116
Submitted February 1, 2015 – Filed March 4, 2015

AFFIRMED

W. Scott Palmer, of W. Scott Palmer Law Firm, P.A., of
Santee, for Appellant.

William Ernest McIntosh, III, of Knight & Whittington,
LLC, of Summerville, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM: Patrice Geddis appeals the special referee's order quieting title in
real property in favor of Respondents, arguing the special referee erred in (1)
concluding the property consisted of 53.8 acres instead of the 35 1/3 acres
originally conveyed and recorded and (2) finding Respondents proved the elements
of adverse possession by clear and convincing evidence. We affirm.

1. We find evidence in the record supports the special referee's determination that
the property consists of 53.8 acres. See Lowcountry Open Land Trust v. State, 347
S.C. 96, 101, 552 S.E.2d 778, 781 (Ct. App. 2001) ("A suit for declaratory
judgment may be legal or equitable, and is characterized as such by the nature of
the underlying issue outlined in the complaint."); Jones v. Leagan, 384 S.C. 1, 10,
681 S.E.2d 6, 11 (Ct. App. 2009) (finding an action to quiet title is normally an
action in equity but when the action involves a determination of title to real
property, the action is legal in nature); id. (stating "appellate review is limited to a
determination of whether any evidence reasonably tends to support the trier of
fact's findings").

2. Because our ruling as to the first issue is dispositive, we need not consider the
remaining issue. See Rule 220(c), SCACR ("The appellate court may affirm any
ruling, order, decision or judgment upon any ground(s) appearing in the Record on
Appeal."); Futch v. McAllister Towing of Georgetown, Inc., 335 S.C. 598, 613, 518
S.E.2d 591, 598 (1999) (holding an appellate court need not review remaining
issues when its determination of a prior issue is dispositive).

AFFIRMED.1

THOMAS, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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