Martin v. Rife

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

Shou Martin, Appellant,

v.

Wilmer (John) Rife and Barbara Ann Doomey,
Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2014-000139

Appeal From Anderson County
J. Cordell Maddox, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-223
Submitted April 1, 2015 – Filed May 6, 2015

AFFIRMED

C. Rauch Wise, of Greenwood, for Appellant.

Michael F. Mullinax, of Mullinax Law Firm, P.A., of
Anderson, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following
authorities: Town of Hollywood v. Floyd, 403 S.C. 466, 480, 744 S.E.2d 161, 168
(2013) ("[A reviewing court] will reverse the trial [court's grant of a judgment
notwithstanding the verdict] only when there is no evidence to support the ruling or
it is controlled by an error of law."); Brock v. Bennett, 313 S.C. 513, 519, 443
S.E.2d 409, 412 (Ct. App. 1994) ("Standing is a fundamental requirement for
instituting an action."); Powell ex rel. Kelley v. Bank of Am., 379 S.C. 437, 444,
665 S.E.2d 237, 241 (Ct. App. 2008) (explaining standing is comprised of three
elements: (1) injury in fact, (2) a causal connection between the injury and the
conduct complained of, and (3) a likelihood the injury will be redressed by a
favorable decision); id. ("The party seeking to establish standing carries the burden
of demonstrating each of the three elements." (internal quotation marks omitted));
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Draper, 405 S.C. 214, 220, 746 S.E.2d 478, 481 (Ct. App.
2013) ("Generally, a party must be a real party in interest to the litigation to have
standing." (internal quotation marks omitted)); id. ("A real party in interest for
purposes of standing is a party with a real, material, or substantial interest in the
outcome of the litigation." (internal quotation marks omitted)); id. ("The South
Carolina rule with respect to the real party in interest requirement . . . has been
regarded as embodying the concept that an action shall be prosecuted in the name
of the party who, by the substantive law, has the right sought to be enforced."
(internal quotation marks omitted)); Brock, 313 S.C. at 519, 443 S.E.2d at 413
("Once it is determined a plaintiff has no standing to prosecute, the court must
dismiss the action." (emphasis added)).

AFFIRMED.1

THOMAS, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.

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