Bailey v. Bailey

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Xavier Bailey,       
Respondent,

v.

Renee Bailey,       
Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County

Rolly W. Jacobs, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 
2003-UP-123

Submitted January 10, 2003 – Filed February 18, 2003

DISMISSED

Renee Bailey, of Columbia; for Appellant.

Xavier Bailey, of Columbia; for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  Xavier Bailey (Husband)
and Renee Bailey (Wife) were granted a divorce on the basis of one year’s separation. 
The family court judge ordered the following: that the parties’ alimony rights
be forever barred, the parties refrain from harassing each other, equitable
distribution of the marital assets (washer and dryer to Husband, household furniture
to Wife), and that Husband pay sum of $500 towards Wife’s attorney fees.

Wife appeals the following: equitable distribution,
alimony, attorney’s fees, and other issues.  Husband did not file a brief.

We dismiss Wife’s appeal pursuant to Rule
220(b)(2), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Charles v. Jacobs,
6 S.C. 69 (1875) (holding that the record on appeal should bring clearly and
succinctly to the court’s attention all necessary elements of the questions
on appeal); Crestwood Golf Club, Inc. v. Potter, 328 S.C. 201, 215, 483
S.E.2d 826, 834 (1997) (holding that the appellant has the burden of presenting
a sufficient record to allow review); Rule 209(h), SCACR (“Except as provided
. . . the appellate court will not consider any fact which does not appear in
the Record on Appeal”); Conran v. Joe Jenkins Realty, Inc., 263 S.C.
332, 210 S.E.2d 309 (1974) (holding that the appellant has the burden of showing
that the lower court erred in some respect; to do this, the appellant must place
in the record on appeal evidence sufficient to support his argument); Tunstall
v. Lerner Shops, Inc., 160 S.C. 557, 562, 159 S.E. 396, 388 (1931) (holding
that an appellate court cannot consider questions relating to points based on
facts not in the record on appeal).  Here, considering that the record on appeal
only consists of the family court’s order and does not include any additional
information concerning, for example, Wife’s standard of living since the separation,
this appeal must be dismissed due to an inadequate record on appeal. 

DISMISSED.

HEARN, CJ., GOOLSBY, and SHULER, JJ.,
concur.