Archive for October, 2012
Posted Sunday, October 21st, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Divorce and Marriage, Jurisprudence, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to General Public
4 Comments »
On October 18, 2012, in 2-1 decision in the case of Windsor v. United States, 699 F. 3d 169 (2nd. Cir. 2012), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) violates equal protection and is therefore unconstitutional. Many Supreme Court watchers believe this […]
Tags: Defense of Marriage Act, Same Sex Marriage, Windsor v. United States
Posted in Divorce and Marriage, Jurisprudence, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to General Public | 4 Comments »
Posted Friday, October 19th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Jurisprudence, Law and Culture, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, Paternity
4 Comments »
A colleague of mine, T. Ryan Phillips, emailed me an October 1, 2012 Tennessee Supreme Court opinion in the case of Hodge v. Craig, 382 S.W.3d 325 (TN. 2012). That opinion approves a cause of action for paternity fraud within that state. With the rise of paternity testing, this cause of action may become more common […]
Tags: Paternity, Paternity Fraud
Posted in Jurisprudence, Law and Culture, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, Paternity | 4 Comments »
Posted Thursday, October 18th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Divorce and Marriage, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
No Comments »
Physical cruelty is one of South Carolina’s four fault divorce grounds. Physical cruelty is “actual personal violence, or such a course of physical treatment as endangers life, limb or health, and renders cohabitation unsafe.” Gorecki v. Gorecki, 387 S.C. 626, 693 S.E.2d 419 (2010). In considering what acts constitute physical cruelty, the family court must consider […]
Tags: Divorce, Physical Cruelty
Posted in Divorce and Marriage, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific | No Comments »
Posted Saturday, October 13th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
2 Comments »
The rare occasions when I am required to wade into the morass of the federal Stored Wire and Electronic Communications and Transactional Records Access Act (SCA), 18 U.S.C. § 2701 and Wire and Electronic Communications Interception and Interception of Oral Communications Act. 18 U.S.C. § 2501, I find myself hopeless lost and call upon our […]
Tags: Richard G. Whiting, South Carolina Supreme Court, Stored Communications Act
Posted in Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific | 2 Comments »
Posted Saturday, October 6th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Guardians Ad Litem, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys
160 Comments »
Twenty years experience shows that there’s some validity to Robert Rosen’s jaundiced view of guardians ad litem in private custody cases, best expressed by the title of one of his articles for South Carolina Lawyer: “Getting Rid of the GAL: How to Save Your Client from Those Expensive, Unnecessary Officious Intermeddlers.” As Rosen’s article notes: […]
Tags: Child Custody, Guardian ad litem, Litigation Strategy, Robert Rosen
Posted in Child Custody, Guardians Ad Litem, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys | 160 Comments »
