SCDSS v. Rose Pandola

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 Supreme Court South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent, v. Rose Pandola and John Wallace, IV, Defendants, Of whom Rose Pandola is the Petitioner.

In the interest of minors under the age of eighteen.

Appellate Case No. 2025-002080

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

Appeal From Charleston County Michèle Patrão Forsythe, Family Court Judge

Memorandum Opinion No. 2026-MO-001 Heard March 10, 2026 – Filed March 18, 2026

DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED Adam Sinclair Ruffin, of Ruffin Law Firm, LLC, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Sally R. Young, of North Charleston, and Alwyn Taylor Silver, of Georgetown, both for Respondent.

Joshua Keith Roten, of Summerville, for Guardian Ad Litem Kathryn Clement.

PER CURIAM: We granted certiorari to review the court of appeal's decision in SCDSS v. Pandola, Op. No. 2025-UP-289 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Aug. 5, 2025). After careful consideration of the Appendix and briefs, the writ of certiorari is DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.

KITTREDGE, C.J., FEW, JAMES, HILL and VERDIN, JJ., concur.