Brown v. State Farm

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

Levi Thomas Brown, Appellant,

v.

State Farm Fire and Casualty Insurance Company,
Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2017-000479

Appeal From Charleston County
W. Jeffrey Young, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-317
Submitted June 1, 2018 – Filed July 11, 2018

AFFIRMED

Robert Emmet Treacy, Jr., and Patrick Thomas Napolski,
both of George Sink, PA Injury Lawyers, of North
Charleston, for Appellant.

Timothy Alan Domin, of Clawson & Staubes, LLC, of
Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: In this appeal from a declaratory judgment action, Levi Thomas
Brown appeals the circuit court's ruling that State Farm Fire and Casualty
Insurance Company's uninsured motorist provision provided no coverage for a
gunshot injury Brown sustained while operating the insured vehicle. The circuit
court found the injury was not covered under the policy because it was not
foreseeably identifiable with the normal use of an automobile and the policy
contained an exclusion for bodily injury resulting from the discharge of a firearm.
Brown did not appeal the circuit court's ruling concerning the exclusion. We
affirm1 pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Jones v.
Lott, 387 S.C. 339, 346, 692 S.E.2d 900, 903 (2010) ("Under the two issue rule,
[when] a decision is based on more than one ground, the appellate court will affirm
unless the appellant appeals all grounds because the unappealed ground will
become the law of the case."); Anderson v. Short, 323 S.C. 522, 525, 476 S.E.2d
475, 477 (1996) (affirming the circuit court's decision when it ruled against the
appellant on two grounds and the appellant only challenged the second ground on
appeal).

AFFIRMED.

SHORT, THOMAS, and HILL, JJ., concur.

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