Langley v. Bowers

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals Herman E. Langley, Appellant, v. Keisha Bowers, Barbara Privette, Donnie Bowers and Tommie Jo Bowers, Respondents. Appeal From Lancaster County Paul E. Short, Jr., Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-294 Submitted February 20, 2003 - Filed April 30, 2003 AFFIRMED Mr. Herman E. Langley, of Bennettsville; for Appellant. Mr. Donnie Bowers, Ms. Keisha Bowers, and Ms. Tommie Jo Bowers, all of Virginia Beach; Ms. Barbara Privette, of Lancaster; for Respondents. PER CURIAM: Herman E. Langley appeals from a decision by the circuit court judge that a deed signed by Langley was not procured through fraud. Langley frames the single issue in this case as follows: “Does the Judge’s ruling within this case have probative value as a matter of South Carolina Laws and Statutes?” We affirm [1] pursuant to Rule 220, SCACR, and the following authorities: Humbert v. State, 345 S.C. 332, 548 S.E.2d 862 (2001) (requiring an issue to raised to and ruled upon by the trial court before the issue will be considered on appeal); Mutual Sav. & Loan Assoc. v. McKenzie, 274 S.C. 630, 632-33, 266 S.E.2d 423, 425 (1980) (placing the burden on the moving party to establish all nine elements of fraud); Coleman v. Daniel, 261 S.C. 198, 202, 199 S.E.2d 76 (1973) (stating this court can make its own findings of fact in cases of equity); Smith v. McClam, 280 S.C. 398, 399, 312 S.E.2d 260, 261 (Ct. App. 1984) (stating an action to set aside a deed sounds in equity). AFFIRMED. HEARN, C.J., CURETON and GOOLSBY, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215,SCACR.