S.C. 71, 76, 497 S.E.2d 731, 733 (1998) (“It is axiomatic that an issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review.”). In an effort to circumvent the issue preservation rule, a fundamental principle of appellate procedure with which Appellants are familiar, we are once again confronted with a subject matter jurisdiction claim. We reject this desperate, eleventh-hour attack on Judge Hughston and the assertion that he lacked jurisdiction to preside over this case. His authority to render judgment is beyond question, and if Appellants desired his recusal, they should have done so in a proper and timely manner. See Parker v. Shecut, 340 S.C. 460, 496-97, 531 S.E.2d 546, 566 (Ct.App.2000) (<HOLDING>). Lifting of the Automatic Stay On October 10,
holding an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the trial court in order to be preserved for review holding the issue of recusal of the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review must be raised in the trial court holding issue cannot be raised for the first time on appeal but must have been raised to and ruled upon by the trial judge to be preserved for appellate review holding that issues must be raised and ruled upon in the trial court to be preserved for appellate review holding an issue must be raised to and ruled upon by the trial court to be preserved for appellate review