M. McFall Babb v. Horry County

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

M. McFall Babb, Appellant,

v.

Horry County, Respondent.

Appeal From Horry County

J. Michael Baxley, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-163

Submitted February 1, 2010 – Filed
February 24, 2010   

AFFIRMED

Barbara Wilson Pratt, of Little River, for
Appellant.

John Weaver, of Conway, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  M. McFall Babb appeals the circuit
court's affirmance of the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) order denying a
special residential tax assessment of four percent for the tax year 2003 on
property known as 4668 River Road, Little River, South Carolina.  Babb argues:
(1) the circuit court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear his appeal due
to his father's bankruptcy stay; (2) the ALC committed an error of law when it
took judicial notice of Babb's family court records; and (3) the ALC's order is
not supported by the evidence.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities:

1.  As to whether the circuit
court lacked subject matter jurisdiction:  11 U.S.C. § 362(a) (2006) (stating
the automatic stay of bankruptcy applies generally to actions and proceedings
against the debtor and his property).

2.  As to whether the circuit court erred taking judicial notice of family
court records:  I'On, L.L.C. v. Town of Mount Pleasant, 338 S.C. 406, 422, 526 S.E.2d 716, 724 (2000) ("Imposing [the]
preservation requirement on the appellant is meant to enable the lower court to
rule properly after it has considered all relevant facts, law, and
arguments."); Widman v. Widman, 348 S.C. 97, 119, 557 S.E.2d 693, 704 (Ct. App. 2001) ("As a general rule, an issue may not be raised for the
first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the court
below to be preserved for appellate review.").

3. As to whether the ALC's order was
supported by sufficient evidence: Waters
v. S.C. Land Res. Conservation Comm'n, 321 S.C. 219, 226, 467 S.E.2d 913,
917 (1996) ("[T]he burden is on appellants to prove convincingly that the [ALC's]
decision is unsupported by the evidence.").

AFFIRMED. 

SHORT,
WILLIAMS, JJ., and CURETON, A.J., concur.

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