Green v. Green

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

Valerie Green, Appellant,

v.

The Estate of Jake Green a/k/a Jacob Green, Margaret
Wilder (deceased), Mary Harrell a/k/a Mary Cromedy
(deceased), Henry Green (deceased), Thomas Henry
Green (deceased), Ethel Bengall, Rebecca Alls
(deceased), Rena Mae Green-Calvin, Barbara Green,
Linda Cromedy, Walter Harrell, Laverna Green,
Kathleen Pinkston, Robert Kinloch, Oliver Alls, Jackie
Alls, Norman Alls , Isaac Alls (deceased), Isaac Alls, Jr.,
Evelyn Alls Terry, Patricia Spratton, Hazel Owens,
Suzette Ford, Linda Beauford, Lanny Venning, Thomas
Wilder (deceased), Thomas Wilder, Jr., Savona Green,
Terrance Green, Nathaniel Green, Henry Green, Jr.,
Marcella Brown, Valerie Green, John Doe and Mary
Roe, fictitious names used to designate persons in the
military service within the meaning of Title 50, United
States Code, commonly referred to as the Service
Members Civil Relief Act of 2003 as amended, if any,
and the unknown heirs at law, devisees, widows,
widowers, executors, personal representatives, successors
and assigns firms or corporations of the Estate of Jake
Green and any of the defendants who may be deceased,
and all other persons claiming any right, title, estate,
interest in or lien upon the real estate described in the
complaint of in the complaint or any part thereof,
Defendants,

Of whom The Estate of Jake Green a/k/a Jacob Green,
Margaret Wilder (deceased), Mary Harrell a/k/a Mary
Cromedy (deceased), Henry Green (deceased), Thomas
Henry Green (deceased), Ethel Bengall, Rebecca Alls
(deceased), Rena Mae Green-Calvin, Barbara Green,
Linda Cromedy, Walter Harrell, Laverna Green,
Kathleen Pinkston, Robert Kinloch, Oliver Alls, Jackie
Alls, Norman Alls, Isaac Alls (deceased), Isaac Alls, Jr.,
Evelyn Alls Terry, Patricia Spratton, Hazel Owens,
Suzette Ford, Linda Beauford, Lanny Venning, Thomas
Wilder (deceased), Thomas Wilder, Jr., Savona Green,
Terrance Green, Nathaniel Green, Henry Green, Jr., and
Marcella Brown are Respondents.

Appellate Case No. 2018-000438

Appeal From Berkeley County
Dale Edward Van Slambrook, Master-in-Equity

Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-208
Submitted June 1, 2020 – Filed July 1, 2020

AFFIRMED

Willie Bruce Heyward, of Heirs Property Law Center,
LLC, of Charleston, for Appellant.

David M. Low, of Low Law Firm, of Mount Pleasant, for
Respondents.

PER CURIAM: Valerie Green (Valerie) appeals the master-in-equity's order that
quieted title to two pieces of real property (collectively, the Property) in Berkeley
County and found that Henry Green, Jr., Valerie's father (Father), had three
children—Valerie, Nathaniel Collins (Collins), and Martha Greer (Greer)—who
were entitled to a percentage of the Property. On appeal, Valerie argues the master
failed to properly evaluate the testimonies at trial. We affirm.1

Initially, we note this court's standard of review is de novo because this was a quiet
title action and the action was based in equity. See Major v. Penn Cmty. Servs.,
Inc., 395 S.C. 175, 180, 717 S.E.2d 70, 72 (Ct. App. 2011) ("Generally, an action
to quiet title is one in equity."); Freeman v. Freeman, 323 S.C. 95, 98, 473 S.E.2d
467, 469 (Ct. App. 1996) ("Therefore, this court may view the evidence to
determine facts in accordance with its own view of the preponderance of the
evidence, though we are not required to disregard the findings of the master."); id.
("Nor are we required to ignore the fact that the master, who saw and heard the
witnesses, is in a better position to evaluate their credibility.").

Under our de novo review, we find clear and convincing proof supports the
master's determination that Father had three children—Valerie, Collins, and Greer.
See S.C. Code Ann. § 62-2-109(2)(ii) (2009) ("If, for purposes of intestate
succession, a relationship of parent and child must be established to determine
succession by, through, or from a person . . . . In cases not covered by [adoptions],
a person born out of wedlock is a child of the mother. That person is also a child
of the father if: . . . the paternity is established by an adjudication commenced
before the death of the father or within the later of eight months after the death of
the father or six months after the initial appointment of a personal representative of
his estate and, if after his death, by clear and convincing proof . . . ."). At trial, the
master took testimony from four witnesses and admitted several exhibits without
objection.2 Collins testified he learned from several family members, including
Father's mother, that Father was his father, and he stated he visited Father and
introduced his family to Father. Furthermore, Collins described a pamphlet from
the funeral that was admitted at trial, listing him, Valerie, and Greer as Father's
children, and he also stated a newspaper listed him as one of Father's children.
Likewise, Greer testified Father was her father, and she explained she knew that
because her mother, grandmother, and Father told her so. Greer further testified
Father wrote her letters, sent her "things," and interacted with her children. Greer
also identified a biography the funeral home generated and stated it listed her,
Valerie, and Collins as Father's children, and she identified the Charleston County
Paper that stated the same. Moreover, Greer and Collins stated they signed
Father's insurance documents at Valerie's direction. Additionally, Greer's maternal
aunt testified Father was Greer and Collins's father. We acknowledge Collins and

1
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
2
These exhibits have not been included in the record on appeal.
Greer testified their birth certificates did not list Father as their father, and their
relationships with Father were not the strongest. However, even Valerie
acknowledged she had "heard" about Collins and Greer before. She explained
individuals specifically pointed Collins out to her as her brother twenty years prior,
and she "heard [she] had a sister." Based on the testimony from trial, we find clear
and convincing proof supports the master's determination. Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.

LOCKEMY, C.J., and GEATHERS and HEWITT, JJ., concur.