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 Court of Appeals

Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB, Respondent,

v.

Katharine Brown, a/k/a Katherine Brown, Associates Financial Serv., Richland Memorial Hosp/Charles Hallman, Sun Finance and Ford Motor Credit Company, Defendants, of whom Katharine Brown is Appellant.

Appeal From Richland County
Joseph M. Strickland, Master-in-Equity

Opinion No. 2004-UP-471
Submitted September 14, 2004 –Filed September 16, 2004

AFFIRMED

Arthur K. Aiken, of Columbia, for Appellant.

D. Randolph Whitt, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM:  This is a mortgage foreclosure action.  Katharine Brown appeals from the master-in-equity’s order finding she “failed to meet her burden of proof in establishing any defense to the foreclosure action.”  We affirm. [1]

FACTS

On September 29, 1995, Brown executed and delivered a promissory note to Ford Consumer Finance Company, Inc. (Ford), the predecessor in interest of Ocwen Federal Savings Bank, FSB (Ocwen).  Pursuant to the note, Brown promised to pay to Ford the principal sum of $41,676, with interest at the rate of 13.10 percent per annum.  The note was secured by a mortgage given by Brown to Ford covering property located at 149 Crane Creek Drive in Richland County.  The mortgage was thereafter assigned to Ocwen.

Ocwen instituted this action against Brown seeking a foreclosure of the mortgage and a sale of the property.  “Associates Financial Serv., Richland Memorial Hosp/Charles Hallman, Sun Finance and Ford Motor Credit Company” were made parties by virtue of the fact that they may have or claim to have some right, title, interest in or lien upon the real property as judgment creditors.  Brown was “[t]he titleholder[] of record of the . . . property” to be foreclosed.  An order compelling discovery responses required Brown to produce any evidence she had of payment on the note and mortgage by April 9, 2002.

The master-in-equity held a foreclosure hearing.  The master found the note and mortgage were in default and ordered foreclosure of the mortgage and sale of the subject property at public auction.  Further, the master determined the “[p]rincipal amount due as of April 22, 2002” was $41,200.08, with interest “from June 4, 1998 to June 17, 2002 at the rate of 13.10 [percent] per annum” totaling $22,067.03.  The Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale was dated July 11, 2002, and filed on July 16, 2002.

On August 2, 2002, Brown filed a motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e), SCRCP.  In the motion, Brown asserted the judgment “should be altered or amended to make a finding of a failure to comply with the attorney preference requirement” because she “presented uncontested evidence that the Plaintiff’s predecessor-in-interest, Ford Motor Cr