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

Watson Finance Co. Inc., Appellant,

v.

Sue M. Fisher, Respondent.

Appeal From Greenville County
G. Edward Welmaker, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-306
Submitted May 1, 2012 – Filed May 16, 2012   

AFFIRMED

Kenneth E. Sowell, of Anderson, for Appellant.

Rodney M. Brown, of Fountain Inn, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Watson Finance Company (Company) appeals the circuit court's order, arguing the circuit court erred in affirming the magistrate's order directing a verdict in favor of Fisher because the magistrate improperly excluded Company's testimony regarding the price of a repair bill.  We affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: Butler v. Edgefield, 328 S.C. 238, 248, 493 S.E.2d 838, 843 (1997) (holding the circuit court, acting as an appellate court in a case heard by the magistrate, cannot consider questions that have not been presented to the magistrate); Taylor v. Medenica, 324 S.C 200, 216, 479 S.E.2d 35, 43 (1996) (holding a party may not argue one ground at trial and an alternate ground on appeal).

AFFIRMED.

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

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