Johnson v. Mozingo

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 Raymond A. Johnson, Appellant v. L. Elaine Mozingo, Respondent Appeal From Florence County J. Mark Hayes, II, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-489 Submitted November 1, 2010 - Filed November 4, 2010 AFFIRMED Raymond A. Johnson, pro se, of Florence, for Appellant. Weldon R. Johnson and Matthew G. Gerrald, both of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Raymond A. Johnson appeals from the circuit court's order granting L. Elaine Mozingo's Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP, motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Johnson argues the circuit court erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction to hear Johnson's claims. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Rule 220(c), SCACR ("The appellate court may affirm any ruling, order, decision or judgment upon any ground(s) appearing in the Record on Appeal."); Doe v. Marion, 373 S.C. 390, 395, 645 S.E.2d 245, 247 (2007) ("In considering a motion to dismiss a complaint based on a failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, the trial court must base its ruling solely on allegations set forth in the complaint."); McNair v. Rainsford, 330 S.C. 332, 343, 499 S.E.2d 488, 494 (Ct. App. 1998) ("Before a claim of professional malpractice may be asserted, an attorney-client relationship must exist."). AFFIRMED. THOMAS, PIEPER, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.