Earp v. Perritte

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

Bobbie Earp, Respondent,

v.

Sean Perritte, Appellant.

Appellate Case No. 2011-204626

Appeal From Berkeley County
Jack A. Landis, Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-605
Submitted October 26, 2012 – Filed November 7, 2012

AFFIRMED

Merrill A. Cox, of Cox Law Firm, of Goose Creek, for
Appellant.

Bobbie Earp, pro se, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Sean Perritte appeals the family court's denial of his motion in
reference to bankruptcy. Perritte argues an automatic stay in a Chapter 13
bankruptcy bars the continuation of an order of incarceration for civil contempt for
failure to pay child support. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and
the following authorities: King v. King, 384 S.C. 134, 142, 681 S.E.2d 609, 614
(Ct. App. 2009) (holding issues must be raised to and ruled upon by the family
court to be preserved for appellate review); Bodkin v. Bodkin, 388 S.C. 203, 219,
694 S.E.2d 230, 239 (Ct. App. 2010) (holding when the family court fails to rule
on an issue presented, the issue must be raised in a Rule 59(e), SCRCP, motion to
be preserved for review).

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT, KONDUROS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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