must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial court.”). II. Good Cause Owens argues the master erred in finding Owens failed to demonstrate good cause for failing to answer the complaint. We disagree. Rule 55(a), SCRCP, provides that when a party fails to respond to a complaint, the clerk shall record an entry of default. However, Rule 55(c), SCRCP, permits a party to move to set aside the entry of default. The standard for granting relief from an entry of default under Rule 55(c) is mere “good cause.” “This standard requires a party seeking relief from an entry of default under Rule 55(c) to provide an explanation for the default and give reasons why vacation of the default entry would serve the interests of justice.” Sundown Operating Co. v. 463 S.E.2d 636, 639 (Ct.App.1995) (<HOLDING>). Owens also asserts the master erred in
holding that the court should make factual findings from the record evidence as if it were conducting a trial on the record holding that a district court is not required to make a specific finding of manifest necessity or articulate on the record all the factors which informed the deliberate exercise of its discretion as long as the record as a whole provides sufficient justification for the ruling holding the findings of fact required to support an alimony award are sufficient if findings of fact have been made on the ultimate facts at issue in the case and the findings of fact show the trial court properly applied the law in the case holding that the fourth waller factor was satisfied despite the lack of specific findings of fact where the information gleaned from the record was  sufficient to support the partial temporary closure of petitioners trial holding the trial court is not required to make specific findings of fact on the record for each wham factor if the record contains sufficient evidentiary support for the finding of lack of good cause