Reynolds v. Reynolds

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS 

PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Horace Reynolds, Jr., Appellant,

v.

Diane Reynolds, Respondent.

Appeal From Richland County

 George M. McFaddin, Jr., Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2006-UP-318

Submitted May 1, 2006 – Filed August 7, 2006

DISMISSED

Horace Reynolds, Jr., of Columbia, for Appellant

Diane Reynolds, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Appellant, Horace Reynolds, Jr., appeals from an order of the family court finding a non-lawyer prepared the legal documents in this matter, thus constituting the illegal practice of law . Reynolds bases his appeal on the family court judge’s dismissal of his action. On remand from this court, the family court clarified that it merely continued the hearing and did not dismiss the action. “It is well settled that an order granting a continuance is an interlocutory order not involving the merits and is, thus, not directly appealable. Walker v. Springs Indus., Inc., 298 S.C. 249, 251, 379 S.E.2d 729, 730 (Ct. App. 1989); Temples v. Ramsey, 285 S.C. 600, 602, 330 S.E.2d 558, 559 (Ct. App. 1985).

We therefore dismiss this appeal from an interlocutory order.[1]

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HUFF, STILWELL, and BEATTY JJ., concur.

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