Doe v. Hutto, 2022-UP-418

CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
PartiesJohn Doe, Respondent, v. Joseph Andrew Hutto, Jane Doe, and Baby Doe, a minor under the age of fourteen (14) years, Defendants, Of whom Joseph Andrew Hutto is the Appellant.
Docket Number2022-UP-418,Appellate Case 2021-001178
Decision Date21 November 2022

John Doe, Respondent,
v.

Joseph Andrew Hutto, Jane Doe, and Baby Doe, a minor under the age of fourteen (14) years, Defendants,

Of whom Joseph Andrew Hutto is the Appellant.

No. 2022-UP-418

Appellate Case No. 2021-001178

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

November 21, 2022


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.

Submitted November 18, 2022

Appeal From Greenville County W. Marsh Robertson, Family Court Judge

John Brandt Rucker and Allyson Sue Rucker, both of The Rucker Law Firm, LLC, of Greenville, for Appellant.

Paul C. MacPhail, of MacPhail Law Firm, LLC, of Spartanburg, for Respondent.

1

Megan Goodwin Burke, of Greenville, as Guardian ad Litem.

PER CURIAM

Joseph Andrew Hutto appeals the family court's final order terminating his parental rights to his minor child. See S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570 (Supp. 2022). Upon a thorough review of the record and the family court's findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Ex parte Cauthen, 291 S.C. 465, 354 S.E.2d 381 (1987), we find no meritorious issues warrant briefing. Accordingly, we affirm the family court's ruling and relieve Hutto's counsel.

AFFIRMED.[1]

KONDUROS, HEWITT, and VINSON, JJ., concur.

2

---------

Notes:

[1] We decide this case without argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

---------

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT