Williams v. L'Oreal
Williams v. L'Oreal
Opinion
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 Court of Appeals Emily Williams, Appellant, v. L'Oreal USA, Inc., Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2012-213713
Appeal From Colleton County Perry M. Buckner, Circuit Court Judge
Unpublished Opinion No. 2014-UP-147 Submitted February 2, 2014 – Filed April 2, 2014
AFFIRMED
Eduardo Kelvin Curry, of The Curry Law Firm, LLC, of North Charleston, for Appellant.
Joseph DuRant Thompson III and Sarah Patrick Spruill, both of Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, PA, of Charleston and Greenville, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authority: Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("[A]n issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial [court] to be preserved for appellate review.").
AFFIRMED.1 FEW, C.J., and SHORT and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.
We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.