McIntosh v. McIntosh

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

Steve McIntosh, Appellant,

v.

Kay Hatley McIntosh, Respondent.

Appeal From Horry County
Wylie H. Caldwell, Jr., Family Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No.  2012-UP-156 
Submitted February 1, 2012 Filed March 7, 2012

AFFIRMED

Steve McIntosh, of Oak Island, pro se.

Kay Hatley McIntosh, of Pawley's Island, pro se.

PER CURIAM:  Steve McIntosh (Husband) appeals the family court's order requiring him to pay Kay Hatley McIntosh $1,000.00 per month in permanent periodic alimony.  Husband argues the family court erred in determining he was capable of earning income in addition to his social security benefits.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Rule 210(h), SCACR ("[T]he appellate court will not consider any fact which does not appear in the Record on Appeal."); Smith v. Smith, 386 S.C. 251, 266, 687 S.E.2d 720, 728 (Ct. App. 2009) (noting that "the appealing party has the burden of providing a sufficient record" for appellate review). 

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS, THOMAS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

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