Murphy v. Katz is an unpublished December 2005 order from the South Carolina Court of Appeals.  I represented a father who sought to modify a Georgia custody order against his ex-wife, who lived in Alaska.  After we successfully obtained custody at the temporary hearing, the mother appealed.  However at the time of her appeal she was refusing to comply with any of the South Carolina family court orders and there was a bench warrant out for her arrest.  I filed a motion to dismiss her appeal based on what is called the “fugitive disentitlement doctrine.”  This doctrine is rarely applied in custody cases.  However because the mother had not alleged any abuse by my client against the child and because she was a fugitive from South Carolina, the South Carolina Court of Appeals dismissed her appeal.

During my representation in the South Carolina custody case, Ms. Katz also filed an action in Alaska to modify the Georgia custody order.  Mr. Murphy then asked the Alaska courts to honor the South Carolina custody order.  The Alaska family court dismissed Ms. Katz’s action and agreed to enforce the South Carolina custody order.  Ms. Katz appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court, which, in a published 2007 opinion that I was not involved in, upheld the lower court’s dismissal of her case and registration and enforcement of the South Carolina custody order I obtained for Mr. Murphy. Katz v. Murphy, 165 P.3d 649 (Alaska, 2007).

Put Mr. Forman’s experience, knowledge, and dedication to your service for any of your South Carolina family law needs.

Recent Blog Posts

Before she was the Notorious RBG

I try to keep my politics out of my legal blog and, in the week since United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader

[ + ] Read More

Court of Appeals rejects father’s numerous challenges to custody and support modification decision

The August 26, 2020 Court of Appeals case of Whitesell v. Whitesell finds the Appellant making numerous legal arguments, a few of them

[ + ] Read More

Court of Appeals reopens equitable distribution due to “fraud upon the court”

The August 26, 2020, Court of Appeals opinion in Sanders v. Smith presents an unusual resolution of a Rule 60 motion. Husband filed

[ + ] Read More