Johnson v. Mozingo

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

Raymond A.
Johnson, Appellant

v.

L. Elaine Mozingo, Respondent

Appeal From Florence County

J. Mark Hayes, II, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2010-UP-489

Submitted November 1, 2010 -  Filed
November 4, 2010

AFFIRMED

Raymond A. Johnson, pro se, of Florence,
for Appellant.

Weldon R. Johnson and Matthew G. Gerrald,
both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Raymond
A. Johnson appeals from the circuit court's order granting L. Elaine Mozingo's Rule
12(b)(6), SCRCP, motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which
relief could be granted.  Johnson argues the circuit court erred in dismissing
the complaint on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction to hear Johnson's
claims.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR,
and the following authorities:  Rule
220(c), SCACR ("The appellate court may affirm any ruling, order, decision
or judgment upon any ground(s) appearing in the Record on Appeal."); Doe
v. Marion, 373 S.C. 390, 395, 645 S.E.2d 245, 247 (2007) ("In considering
a motion to dismiss a complaint based on a failure to state facts sufficient to
constitute a cause of action, the trial court must base its ruling solely on
allegations set forth in the complaint."); McNair v. Rainsford, 330
S.C. 332, 343, 499 S.E.2d 488, 494 (Ct. App. 1998) ("Before a claim of
professional malpractice may be asserted, an attorney-client relationship must
exist."). 

AFFIRMED.

THOMAS, PIEPER, and
GEATHERS, JJ., concur. 

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