Graham v. Graham

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

Terence Graham, Appellant,

v.

Brandi Graham, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2017-001455

Appeal From Oconee County
Edgar H. Long, Jr., Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2020-UP-233
Submitted June 1, 2020 – Filed August 12, 2020

AFFIRMED

Terence Graham, of Reidsville, North Carolina, pro se.

Brandi Graham, of Seneca, pro se.

Jeremey Poindexter, of Poindexter Law Firm, LLC, of
Anderson, as the Guardian ad Litem for the minor
children.

PER CURIAM: Terence Graham appeals the family court's final order approving
a consent agreement between him and his ex-wife, Brandi Graham. Because the
underlying order was entered pursuant to a consent agreement and Graham failed
to make any objections at the hearing or file a motion pursuant to Rule 59(e),
SCRCP, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:
Calcutt v. Calcutt, 282 S.C. 565, 572, 320 S.E.2d 55, 59 (Ct. App. 1984) ("It is
well settled an appeal will not be entertained from an order by consent."); Doe v.
Roe, 369 S.C. 351, 375-76, 631 S.E.2d 317, 330 (Ct. App. 2006) ("An issue cannot
be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon
by the [family court] to be preserved for appellate review."); id. at 376, 631 S.E.2d
at 330 ("An issue is not preserved where the [family] court does not explicitly rule
on an argument and the appellant does not make a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or
amend the judgment.").

AFFIRMED.1

HUFF, THOMAS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

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