Tatnall v. Gardner, No. 3498.
| Court | Court of Appeals of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | HOWARD, J. |
| Citation | 564 S.E.2d 377,350 S.C. 135 |
| Docket Number | No. 3498. |
| Decision Date | 20 May 2002 |
| Parties | Mary TATNALL f/k/a Mary Dunn, Plaintiff, v. Betty Jo GARDNER and Joy Logan, Treasurer of Beaufort County, Defendants, Of Whom Mary Tatnall f/k/a Mary Dunn and Betty Jo Gardner are Respondents, and Joy Logan, Treasurer of Beaufort County is the Appellant. |
350 S.C. 135
564 S.E.2d 377
v.
Betty Jo GARDNER and Joy Logan, Treasurer of Beaufort County, Defendants, Of Whom Mary Tatnall f/k/a Mary Dunn and Betty Jo Gardner are Respondents, and
Joy Logan, Treasurer of Beaufort County is the Appellant
No. 3498.
Court of Appeals of South Carolina.
Submitted April 8, 2002.
Decided May 20, 2002.
R. Nicholas Felix, of Bethea, Jordan & Griffin; and J. Ray Westmoreland, both of Hilton Head, for respondents.
This is an appeal from an order denying Joy Logan's motions to reconsider and amend her pleadings to assert third party claims against Betty Jo Gardner. Because all third party claims are permissive, the trial court's order denying Logan's motions to reconsider and amend neither determines a substantial matter "forming the whole or part of some cause of action," nor prevents "a judgment from being rendered in the action" from which Logan could appeal. Therefore, this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear the appeal and it is dismissed without prejudice.
"The jurisdiction of a court over the subject matter of a proceeding is determined by the Constitution, the laws of the state, and is fundamental." Anderson v. Anderson, 299 S.C. 110, 115, 382 S.E.2d 897, 900 (1989). Subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived even with consent of the parties. Hunter v. Boyd, 203 S.C. 518, 525, 28 S.E.2d 412, 416 (1943). The issue of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time including when raised for the first time on appeal to this Court. Brown v. State, 343 S.C. 342, 346, 540 S.E.2d 846, 848-49 (2001). Furthermore, this Court must, on its own motion, raise the issue of subject matter jurisdiction to ensure the "orderly administration of justice." State v. Castleman, 219 S.C. 136, 139, 64 S.E.2d 250, 252 (1951).
[This Court] shall have appellate jurisdiction for correction of errors of law in law cases, and shall review upon appeal:
(1) Any intermediate judgment, order or decree in a law case involving the merits in actions commenced in the court of common pleas ...
(2) An order affecting a substantial right made in an action when such order (a) in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment from which an appeal might be taken or discontinues the action, (b) grants or refuses a new trial or (c) strikes out an answer or any part thereof or any pleading in any...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex Parte Capital U-Drive-It, Inc., No. 26147.
...367, 461 S.E.2d 809 (order denying motion to enforce alleged settlement agreement was not immediately appealable); Tatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 138, 564 S.E.2d 377, 379 (Ct.App.2002) (order denying motion to amend pleadings to assert third party claims was not immediately appealable be......
-
Hagood v. Sommerville, No. 25918.
...may seek appellate review usually is considered an interlocutory order from which no immediate appeal is allowed. Tatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 138, 564 S.E.2d 377, 379 362 S.C. 196 The provisions of Section 14-3-330, including subsection (2), have been narrowly construed and immediate ......
-
The Linda Mc Co. Inc v. Shore, Opinion No. 26878
...matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time including when raised for the first time to an appellate court. SeeTatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 137, 564 S.E.2d 377, 378 (Ct. App. 2002). Even if this Court were to hold that the expiration of the judgment foreclosed Respondent's ability to......
-
Rish v. Rish, 5884
...of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time including when raised for the first time on appeal ...." Tatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 137, 564 S.E.2d 377, 378 (Ct. App. 2002); see S.C. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Tran, 418 S.C. 308, 318-19, 792 S.E.2d 254, 259-60 (Ct. App. 2016) (......
-
Ex Parte Capital U-Drive-It, Inc., No. 26147.
...367, 461 S.E.2d 809 (order denying motion to enforce alleged settlement agreement was not immediately appealable); Tatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 138, 564 S.E.2d 377, 379 (Ct.App.2002) (order denying motion to amend pleadings to assert third party claims was not immediately appealable be......
-
Hagood v. Sommerville, No. 25918.
...may seek appellate review usually is considered an interlocutory order from which no immediate appeal is allowed. Tatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 138, 564 S.E.2d 377, 379 362 S.C. 196 The provisions of Section 14-3-330, including subsection (2), have been narrowly construed and immediate ......
-
The Linda Mc Co. Inc v. Shore, Opinion No. 26878
...matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time including when raised for the first time to an appellate court. SeeTatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 137, 564 S.E.2d 377, 378 (Ct. App. 2002). Even if this Court were to hold that the expiration of the judgment foreclosed Respondent's ability to......
-
Rish v. Rish, 5884
...of subject matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time including when raised for the first time on appeal ...." Tatnall v. Gardner, 350 S.C. 135, 137, 564 S.E.2d 377, 378 (Ct. App. 2002); see S.C. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Tran, 418 S.C. 308, 318-19, 792 S.E.2d 254, 259-60 (Ct. App. 2016) (......