Branch Banking v. Cain

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

Branch Banking and Trust Company, Respondent,

v.

Wilton H. Cain and Cassandra Durrah-Cain, Appellants.

Appellate Case No. 2011-205089

Appeal From Berkeley County
Kristi Lea Harrington, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-333
Submitted July 1, 2014 – Filed September 24, 2014

VACATED AND REMANDED

Wilton H. Cain and Cassandra Durrah-Cain, of
Charleston, pro se.

Samuel C. Waters and Jason David Wyman, both of
Rogers Townsend & Thomas, PC, of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Wilton H. Cain and Cassandra Durrah-Cain appeal the circuit
court's denial of their petition for an order of appraisal following a foreclosure and
entry of a deficiency judgment against them. Because the circuit court's order did
not provide an explanation for its decision to rescind its earlier order granting the
appraisal, we vacate and remand for an order containing specific factual findings
and conclusions of law regarding whether Appellants are entitled to an appraisal.
See In re Treatment & Care of Luckabaugh, 351 S.C. 122, 133, 568 S.E.2d 338,
343 (2002) ("[Appellate courts] do not require a lower court to set out findings on
all the myriad factual questions arising in a particular case. But the findings must
be sufficient to allow this [c]ourt, sitting in its appellate capacity, to ensure the law
is faithfully executed below." (citation omitted)); id. at 133-34, 568 S.E.2d at 343-
44 (vacating and remanding because the order on appeal provided no findings of
fact to support the ultimate legal conclusion).

VACATED AND REMANDED.1

FEW, C.J., and SHORT and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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