Title: Hammer v. Hammer

State: south-carolina

Issuer: South Carolina Supreme Court

Document:

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 Supreme Court Howard Hammer, Appellant, v. Shirley Hammer, a/k/a Shirley Hightower, a/k/a Shirley Grace Hightower, Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2011-192606 Appeal From Richland County John M. Rucker, Family Court Judge Memorandum Opinion No. 2013-MO-003 Submitted February 5, 2013 - Filed February 13, 2013 AFFIRMED Howard Hammer of Columbia, Pro Se Appellant. Timothy E. Madden of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP, of Greenville, for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Ulmer v. Ulmer, 369 S.C. 486, 632 S.E.2d 858 (2006)(an unchallenged ruling of the lower court, right or wrong, constitutes the law of the case and requires affirmance); S.C. Tax Commn. v. Gaston Copper Recycling, 316 S.C. 163, 447 S.E.2d 843 (1994)("This Court will affirm where an appellant fails to appeal [an] alternate ground of a trial judge's ruling."). AFFIRMED. TOAL, C.J., PLEICONES, BEATTY, KITTREDGE and HEARN, JJ., concur.