Southcoast Community Bank v. Low-Country State Leasing

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

Southcoast
Community Bank, Respondent,

v.

Low-Country
State Leasing, LLC a/k/a Low-Country State Leasing, LLC d/b/a McGuire's Irish
Pub, LLC; McGuire's Irish Pub, LLC, Jacqueline Kroth; David Kroth; The United
States of America; South Carolina Department of Revenue; South Carolina
Employment Security Commission; Town of Summerville; Carolina Waste Services;
OK Grocery; and Quattlebaum & Murphy, LLP, Defendants,

Charles R.
Giles, Jr. and Albert Sheppard, Intervenors, Appellants.

Appeal From Dorchester County

Patrick  R. Watts, Master-In-Equity

Unpublished Opinion No. 2011-UP-305

Submitted June 1, 2011 – Filed June 17,
2011  

AFFIRMED

Steven L. Smith, of North Charleston, for
Appellants.

Richard W. Urban, of Columbia; and Samuel
H. Altman, of Charleston, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Charles
R. Giles, Jr. and Albert Sheppard (collectively, "Appellants") appeal
a master-in-equity's denial of their motion to intervene in the foreclosure of
property owned by Low-Country State Leasing, LLC (Low-Country).  The master
held a loan granted by Appellants and purportedly secured by the property did
not grant Appellants a valid interest in the property because the loan was
executed by the owners of Low-Country in their personal capacity.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Ex parte Gov't Emps. Ins. Co., 373 S.C. 132, 135, 644
S.E.2d 699, 701 (2007) ("The decision to grant or deny a motion to . . .
intervene in an action . . . lies within the sound discretion of the trial
court.  This Court will not disturb the lower court's decision on appeal unless
a manifest abuse of discretion is found resulting in an error of law.")
(internal citations and quotation marks omitted); see also id. at
138-39, 644 S.E.2d at 702 (holding a claimant does not have a right to
intervene in the action if the claimant lacks "'an interest relating
to the property . . . which is the subject of the action' as required
by Rule 24(a)(2), SCRCP"); Frasier v. Palmetto Homes of Florence, Inc.,
323 S.C. 240, 244, 473 S.E.2d 865, 867 (Ct. App. 1996) (stating that a party
may not use "agency as a basis of liability" if "the existence
of the agency" is not "clearly established by the facts")
(citations and internal quotation marks omitted). 

AFFIRMED.

HUFF, WILLIAMS,
and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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