Williams v. SC Department of Corrections

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR. THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals Ora Williams, Claimant, Appellant, v. SC Department of Corrections, Employer, and State Accident Fund, as Carrier, Respondents. Appeal From Richland County Daniel F. Pieper, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2008-UP-290 Submitted June 1, 2008 – Filed June 4, 2008 AFFIRMED Preston F. McDaniel and W. Ralph Garris, both of Columbia, for Appellant. Cynthia Burns Polk and Matthew C. Robertson, both of Columbia, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Ora Williams appeals the circuit court's decision affirming the Appellate Panel of the Workers' Compensation Commission. We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Brunson v. Am. Koyo Bearings, 367 S.C. 161, 623 S.E.2d 870, (Ct. App. 2005) (holding a single commissioner's findings of fact and law, if not appealed from, become the law of the case); Reese v. CCI Const. Co., 334 S.C. 600, 604, 514 S.E.2d 144, 145 (Ct. App. 1999) ("[F]ailure to challenge ruling is abandonment of issue and precludes consideration on appeal; unchallenged ruling, right or wrong, is the law of the case and requires affirmance." (citation omitted)); Anderson v. S.C. Dept. of Highways and Public Transp., 322 S.C. 417, 420 n.1, 472 S.E.2d 253, 255 n.1 (1996) ("[An] order would be affirmed under the ‘two issue' rule if the plaintiff failed to appeal both grounds or if one of the grounds required affirmance."); Dropkin v. Beachwalk Villas Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 373 S.C. 360, 365, 644 S.E.2d 808, 811 (Ct. App. 2007) ("Under a second application of the ‘two issue' rule, the appellate court will find it unnecessary to address all the grounds appealed where one requires affirmance."). AFFIRMED. HEARN, C.J., and SHORT, J., and KONDUROS, J., concur. [1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.