person of the principal. 3 . Timmons argues that UBS'S Master Account Agreement should not have been included in the Record on Appeal because UBS failed to present it to the circuit court. We disagree. While the Master Account Agreement was not included with UBS'S pleadings, it was incorporated into the UBS contract by direct reference, and the UBS contract was included in UBS’S Motion to Compel Arbitration. In any event, the circuit court's order sets forth the pertinent language of the arbitration clause in the J.C. Bradford contract and includes a finding that Timmons signed a similar contract with UBS. Timmons did not appeal this finding, and as such, it is the law of the case. See Charleston Lumber Co., Inc. v. Miller Hous. Corp., 338 S.C. 171, 175, 525 S.E.2d 869, 871-72 (2000) (<HOLDING>). 4 . S.C.Code Ann. §§ 43-35-5 to -595
holding that an unappealed order is a final judgment on the merits for res judicata purposes holding that an unappealed contempt order by a bankruptcy court is a final judgment on the merits for res judicata purposes holding that an exhaustion of appellate remedies is required to make a trial courts ruling the law of the case holding a trial judges unappealed procedural rulings become the law of the case holding that an unappealed ruling is the law of the case