Opinion ID: 1320094
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Tax Commission's Conduct

Text: Appellants argue the evidence demonstrates Tax Commission obtained the information in question upon the understanding by Gaston Copper that the information was exempt from disclosure. Appellants further contend Gaston Copper did nothing to waive confidentiality and Tax Commission should be bound by it. The threshold inquiry here is whether the record supports the conclusion Tax Commission agreed the information would be kept confidential. [4] Melane Pike, an attorney employed by Tax Commission, testified that initially Gaston Copper was unwilling to give Tax Commission copies of the purchase agreement and environmental report after being told the information would not be kept confidential. Arrangements were then made for Tax Commission employees to view the documents at Gaston Copper's facility. On their first visit to view the documents, Ms. Pike was asked to sign a confidentiality agreement which she refused to do. Tax Commission employees began reviewing the documents that day and returned to the plant for two days but did not complete their review. Sometime thereafter Gaston Copper decided to surrender the documents. Joe Dennis Harrod, custodian of the documents in question, was at the meeting with Tax Commission employees. He testified that Ms. Pike refused to sign the confidentiality agreement because the information was confidential by statute and no agreement was needed. The trial judge found the facts did not support Gaston Copper's assertion that Tax Commission represented the documents would be kept confidential. Further, he found even if the information could be shown to have been received as confidential, such an act is beyond the authority of a Tax Commission employee. He concluded Tax Commission would not be bound by an employee's promise of confidentiality. Appellants do not challenge the trial judge's conclusion that even if Ms. Pike made the representation alleged, it was beyond her authority and therefore not binding on Tax Commission. This Court will affirm where an appellant fails to appeal the alternative ground of a trial judge's ruling. Biales v. Young, ___ S.C. ___, 432 S.E.2d 482 (1993). Moreover, the fact that the proposed confidentiality agreement was unsigned supports the conclusion no confidentiality was promised. In conclusion, appellants have failed to show any error in the trial judge's finding there was no promise of confidentiality. We need not address appellants' waiver argument. AFFIRMED. CHANDLER, Acting C.J., FINNEY and TOAL, JJ., and WILLIAM L. HOWARD, Acting Associate Justice, concur.