In The Court of Appeals

H2O Leasing, LTD., a Delaware Corporation,        Plaintiff,


H2O Parasail, Inc., Brooke McCullough, Island Water Sports of Hilton Head, Inc., and Richard T. Sonberg, Defendants and Third-party Plaintiffs,        Respondents,


Breakwater Adventures At The Landings, Inc. and Michael Klingensmith, Third-Party Defendants,        Appellants.

Appeal From Beaufort County
Thomas Kemmerlin, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2003-UP-171
Submitted January 10, 2003 – Filed March 4, 2003 


Gregg E. Meyers, of Charleston; for Appellants

Terry A. Finger, of Hilton Head Island; for Respondents.

PER CURIAM:  Appellants appeal the trial court’s denial of their motions for relief from default judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) and Rule 55(c), SCRCP.  We affirm [1] pursuant to Rule 220(c), SCACR, and the following authorities:  Thompson v. Hammond, 299 S.C. 116, 119, 382 S.C. 900, 903 (1989) (stating the trial court’s decision under Rule 60(b) constitutes an abuse of discretion where it is controlled by an error of law or is without evidentiary support); Beaufort Realty Co. v. Beaufort County, 346 S.C. 298, 302, 551 S.E.2d 588, 590 (Ct. App. 2001) (stating arguments of counsel are not evidence and a court may not consider statements of fact appearing only in the arguments of counsel); Saro v. Ocean Holiday P’ship, 314 S.C. 116, 124, 441 S.E.2d 835, 840 (Ct. App. 1994) (“[M]otions for relief under Rule 60(b) are addressed to the discretion of the court and appellate review is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion.”); Bowers v. Bowers, 304 S.C. 65, 67, 403 S.E.2d 127, 129 (Ct. App. 1991) (stating the party seeking relief has the burden to produce evidence proving the facts essential to entitle them to such relief); Ricks v. Weinrauch, 293 S.C. 372, 374, 360 S.E.2d 535, 536 (Ct. App. 1987) (stating the standard for granting relief from a default judgment under Rule 60(b) is more rigorous than the standard for vacating the entry of default, which only requires good cause to be shown).


HEARN, C.J., GOOLSBY and SHULER, JJ., concur.

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