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
|
Pamela J. Raines, |
Appellant, |
v.
|
James Dean Raines, |
Respondent. |
__________
Appeal From Greenwood County
Billy A. Tunstall, Jr., Family Court Judge
__________
Unpublished Opinion No. 2010-UP-145
Submitted February 1, 2010 � Filed February 23, 2010���
__________
AFFIRMED
__________
Christopher Lance Sheek, of Greenwood, for Appellant.
C. Rauch Wise and Ted Ben Wyndham, both of Greenwood, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM:� Pamela J. Raines (Wife) appeals the family court's award of $400 per month in permanent periodic alimony, arguing: (1) the family court erred because the final divorce order did not indicate whether or to what degree the alimony factors were considered pursuant to section 20-3-130(C) of the South Carolina Code (Supp. 2009); and (2) the family court abused its discretion because the alimony award does not put Wife in a similar position as Wife enjoyed during the marriage, nor does it evenly distribute the resources between the parties.� We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authority: �Doe v. Doe, 370 S.C. 206, 212, 634 S.E.2d 51, 55 (Ct. App. 2006) ("[W]hen an appellant neither raises an issue at trial nor through a Rule 59(e), SCRCP, motion, the issue is not preserved for appellate review.").
Affirmed.
SHORT, WILLIAMS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.�