Richard v. Facebook, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
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 Kevin Ralph Richard, Appellant, v. Facebook, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and Maleko Kirk Malepeai, individually, Defendants, Of which Facebook, Inc., a Delaware Corporation is the Respondent. Appellate Case No. 2019-001054 Appeal From Horry County Benjamin H. Culbertson, Circuit Court Judge Unpublished Opinion No. 2021-UP-434 Submitted November 1, 2021 – Filed December 8, 2021 AFFIRMED Mary Madison Brittain Langway and Thomas C. Brittain, both of The Brittain Law Firm, P.A., of Myrtle Beach, for Appellant. Wallace K. Lightsey and Meliah Bowers Jefferson, both of Wyche P.A., and John R. Perkins, Jr., of Perkins Law Firm, all of Greenville; and William Hicks, of San Francisco, California, all for Respondent. PER CURIAM: Kevin Ralph Richard appeals the circuit court's order dismissing his complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(2), SCRCP, dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP, and finding Facebook, Inc. (Facebook) immune from liability under 47 U.S.C. § 230. On appeal, Richard only argues the circuit court erred in finding it lacked personal jurisdiction and in finding Facebook immune from liability. Richard did not appeal the circuit court's dismissal of his complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), SCRCP, for failure to state a claim. Accordingly, we affirm based on the two-issue rule. See Jones v. Lott, 387 S.C. 339, 346, 692 S.E.2d 900, 903 (2010) ("Under the two[-]issue rule, where a decision is based on more than one ground, the appellate court will affirm unless the appellant appeals all grounds because the unappealed ground will become law of the case."), abrogated on other grounds by Repko v. County of Georgetown, 424 S.C. 494, 818 S.E.2d 743 (2018); Atl. Coast Builders & Contractors, LLC v. Lewis, 398 S.C. 323, 329, 730 S.E.2d 282, 285 (2012) ("[A]n unappealed ruling, right or wrong, is the law of the case."). AFFIRMED. 1 KONDUROS, HILL, and HEWITT, JJ., concur. 1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
