Cristiani v. Clark

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

Jonathan Joseph Zurick and Jeana Luise Cristiani,
Respondents,

v.

Matthew Clark, Appellant.

In this interest of minors under the age of eighteen.

Appellate Case No. 2017-001663

Appeal From York County
Thomas Henry White, IV, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2018-UP-153
Submitted March 9, 2018 – Filed April 9, 2018

AFFIRMED

Ernest M. Spong, III, of Ernest M Spong III LLC, of
Winnsboro, for Appellant.

Larry Dale Dove, of Dove Law Group, LLC, of Rock
Hill, for Respondents.

James Wilson Tucker, Jr., of McKinney Tucker &
Lemel, of Rock Hill, as Guardian ad Litem.
PER CURIAM: Matthew Clark appeals an adoption decree finding his consent
was not necessary for the adoption of two minor children. See S.C. Code Ann.
§ 63-9-310(A)(4) (2010). Upon a thorough review of the record and the family
court's findings of facts and conclusions of law pursuant to Ex parte Cauthen, 291
S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we find no meritorious issues that warrant
briefing. Accordingly, we affirm the family court's ruling and relieve Clark's
counsel.

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, GEATHERS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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