Truesdale v. Charleston County Sheriff's Department

CourtListener 10153395Scctapp15 mars 2010

Texte intégral

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

Isaiah Truesdale,
Jr., Appellant,

v.

Charleston County Sheriff's
Department, Respondent.

Appeal From Charleston County

  Deadra L. Jefferson, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-206

Submitted March 1, 2010 – Filed March 15, 2010   

APPEAL DISMISSED

Thomas R. Goldstein, of Charleston, for Appellant.

Joseph Dawson, III, Bernard E. Ferrara, Jr., Bernice M. Jenkins, and
Austin A. Bruner, all of North Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Isaiah Truesdale appeals the circuit court's dismissal of his action for failure to
prosecute.  We dismiss[1] Truesdale's appeal pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR,
and the following authorities:  Rule 203(b)(1), SCACR (providing (1) a party wishing
to appeal an order of the circuit court must serve a notice of appeal on all respondents "within thirty days after receipt of written notice of entry of
the order or judgment" and (2) a timely Rule 59(e), SCRCP, motion to alter
or amend judgment stays the time for appeal until the appellant receives
"written notice of entry of the order granting or denying such
motion");  Rule 203(d)(3), SCACR (providing an untimely notice of appeal shall be dismissed); Rule
77(d), SCRCP ("Immediately upon the entry of an order or judgment the
clerk shall serve a notice of the entry by first class mail upon every party
affected thereby . . . .  Such mailing is
sufficient notice for all purposes for which notice of the entry of an order or
judgment is required by these rules."); Ex parte Morris, 367 S.C.
56, 64, 624 S.E.2d 649, 653 (2006) (holding counsel's statements and
arguments regarding the facts of a case are not admissible evidence
and will not be considered on appeal).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PIEPER and GEATHERS, JJ., and CURETON,
A.J., concur.

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

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.