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 Bernard Loyer, Jr. and Sherry Loyer, Respondents, v. S17 Owners Association, Inc.; John L. Avent; Frances Avent; Sylvia S. Berger; Robert J. Berning; Jeanne M.

Clavel; Greg Connell; Gerald Crawford; Bruce C.

Douglas; Jonathan D. Dunn; Les Galazka; Michael V. Goransky; Frank L. Gougher; David E. Harris; Cathryn A. Knight; John H. Lacher; Kyle R. Larson; Laura Linn; Roger McCoig; Charles Wilmot Miller; Michael O'Brien; Carolyn M. Rischbieter; William Satcher; and Belinda Smith-Sullivan, Defendants, Of Whom S17 Owners Association, Inc.; John L. Avent; Frances Avent; Sylvia S. Berger; Greg Connell; Jonathan D. Dunn; Michael V. Goransky; Frank L. Gougher; David E. Harris; Cathryn A. Knight; John H. Lacher; Kyle R. Larson; Michael O'Brien; Carolyn M.

Rischbieter; and Belinda Smith-Sullivan are Appellants, And of Whom Charles Wilmot Miller is a Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2014-001742

Appeal From Edgefield County Kathy Ouzts Rushton, Special Referee

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-469 Submitted August 1, 2015 – Filed October 7, 2015

AFFIRMED

Philip Herman Woolhiser, of Woolhiser, Inc., of Aiken, for Appellants.

Bernard Loyer, Jr., of Trenton, pro se.

Sherry Loyer, of Trenton, pro se.

Paul Knapp Simons, Jr., of Hull Barrett, PC, of Aiken, for Respondent Charles Wilmot Miller.

PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal a special referee's order and judgment of foreclosure and sale. We affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Jones v. Daley, 363 S.C. 310, 315, 609 S.E.2d 597, 599 (Ct. App. 2005) ("It is well-settled that an 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." (internal quotation marks omitted)); Wilder Corp. v. Wilke, 330 S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) ("[A]n objection must be sufficiently specific to inform the trial court of the point being urged by the objector.").

AFFIRMED.1 FEW, C.J., and KONDUROS and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.