Emery v. Smith, 361 S.C. 207, 603 S.E.2d 598 (Ct.App.2004), is a published September 2004 opinion from the South Carolina Court of Appeals. I was retained to defend an appeal of a family court order requiring Mr. Smith to reimburse his ex-wife (my client) for her 25% share of his military retirement benefits that he had failed to pay her over an approximate ten-year period. At trial in the family court, Mr. Smith had argued that laches barred Ms. Emery’s claim but the family court rejected this defense. Mr. Smith raised the same defense on appeal.
The Court of Appeals again rejected Mr. Smith’s laches defense and held in Ms. Emery’s favor. It found that his failure to notice his ex-wife of his retirement, as required under the parties’ order, barred his laches claim. Because Ms. Emery would not know of her entitlement to retirement benefits until she was informed by Mr. Smith of his retirement, the Court of Appeals found that any delay in enforcing her rights to this retirement was Mr. Smith’s doing, and thus the delay was not unreasonable on her part.
This appeal was part of my inspiration for the lecture The Laches Defense in Family Court.
Court of Appeals finds agreement to pay agreement to pay half of college expenses was not ambiguous
The March 18, 2026, Court of Appeals opinion in Fennell v. Fennell, affirmed a family court order finding Father in contempt for not
Court of Appeals reverses award of alimony to underemployed wife of a frugal marriage
The January 14, 2026, Court of Appeals opinion in Scherba v. Scherba, which was refiled on February 11, 2026, and then again on
2025 demonstrates a shocking low in published family court opinions
In the 17 years I have been doing this blog, I do a year-end summary of published family court opinions. 2025 has a