LaSalle Bank v. Toney

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

LaSalle Bank National
Association, trustee for Lehman
Brothers Structured Asset
Investment Loan Trust Sail
2005-2, Respondent,

v.
Laura T. Toney a/k/a Laurie T.
Toney and Deutsche Bank
National Trust Company, Defendants,
Of whom Laura T. Toney a/k/a
Laurie T. Toney is the Appellant.

__________

Appeal From Orangeburg County
Olin D. Burgdorf, Master-in-Equity
__________

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-409
Submitted June 1, 2012 – Filed July 11, 2012
__________

AFFIRMED
__________
Laura T. Toney, pro se, of Bishopville.

B. Rush Smith, III, Michael J. Anzelmo, and Betsy
Polk, all of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Laura T. Toney appeals a master-in-equity's
supplemental order and judgment of foreclosure and sale, arguing the master
erred in failing to secure a court reporter for the foreclosure hearing and in
violating her right to procedural due process. As to both of Toney's
arguments, we affirm1 pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Herron v. Century BMW, 395 S.C. 461, 465, 719 S.E.2d 640, 642
(2011) ("At a minimum, issue preservation requires that an issue be raised to
and ruled upon by the trial [court]."); SSI Med. Servs., Inc. v. Cox, 301 S.C.
493, 499, 392 S.E.2d 789, 793 (1990) (holding an issue raised to the trial
court was not preserved for review when the trial court never ruled upon the
issue and the issue was never raised in an appropriate post-trial motion);
Germain v. Nichol, 278 S.C. 508, 509, 299 S.E.2d 335, 335 (1983)
("Appellant has the burden of providing this [c]ourt with a sufficient record
upon which this [c]ourt can make its decision.").

AFFIRMED.

PIEPER, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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