Sherry A. Lee v. Light Rx Greenville

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

Sherry A. Lee, Respondent,

v.

Light Rx Greenville, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2021-000532

Appeal From Greenville County
Charles B. Simmons, Jr., Master-in-Equity

Unpublished Opinion No. 2023-UP-038
Submitted January 1, 2023 – Filed February 1, 2023

AFFIRMED

Kimberly Truluck Thomason and Devon Marc Puriefoy,
both of Truluck Thomason, LLC, of Greenville, for
Appellant.

Sherry A. Lee, of Fayetteville, North Carolina, pro se.

PER CURIAM: Light Rx Greenville appeals the master-in-equity's order holding
it in contempt, imposing a $3,000 sanction, and awarding Sherry A. Lee her travel
expenses. On appeal, Light Rx Greenville argues the master erred in imposing a
criminal, rather than a civil, sanction after Light Rx Greenville failed to appear as
ordered. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("It
is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must
have been raised to and ruled upon by the [master] to be preserved for appellate
review."); Stanley v. S. States Police Benevolent Ass'n, 435 S.C. 524, 527, 868
S.E.2d 412, 414 (Ct. App. 2021) ("When a party receives an order containing relief
that was not requested or contemplated, the party must present its objections to the
issue to the trial court in a Rule 59(e), SCRCP, motion to preserve the issue for
appeal."); Abba Equip., Inc. v. Thomason, 335 S.C. 477, 486, 517 S.E.2d 235, 240
(Ct. App. 1999) (noting an appellant "bears the burden of providing an adequate
record for [the appellate] court to conduct a proper review").

AFFIRMED. 1

GEATHERS, MCDONALD, and HILL, JJ., concur.

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