Doe v. Graf

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE.  IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 239(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court

Jane Doe, Appellant,

v.

Carol Graf, M.D., and Carol M. Graf & Associates, Respondents.

Appeal From Charleston County
 Thomas L. Hughston, Jr., Circuit Court Judge

Memorandum Opinion No.    2006-MO-014
Heard March 9, 2006 Filed May 1, 2006

AFFIRMED

Gregg E. Meyers, of Charleston, for Appellant.

Stephen L. Brown, Matthew Kiel Mahoney, and Carol Brittain Ervin, all of Young, Clement, Rivers, of Charleston, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM:  Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR and the following authority: Brown v. Leverette, 291 S.C. 364, 353 S.E.2d 697 (1987) (Rule 12(b)(6) SCRCP motion to dismiss must be granted if facts alleged in complaint and inferences reasonably deducible therefrom do not entitle plaintiff to relief on any theory of the case). 

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, PLEICONES, JJ., and Acting Justice Roger L. Couch, concur.