How solo attorneys can work fewer hours, make more money, and have greater job satisfaction

Posted Friday, February 6th, 2015 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Law Practice Management, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys

When I talk to law students or young attorneys about law office management, I often show them the following formula as a method of getting

Court of Appeals continues recent trend of rejecting a family court’s credibility determinations

Posted Wednesday, December 24th, 2014 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Attorney's Fees, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

One portion of this opinion was substantially modified on February 25, 2015: Refiled opinion in Srivastava makes revisions to equitable distribution ruling. The December 23, 2014

Supreme Court sets procedures for family court attorney fee awards

Posted Wednesday, December 3rd, 2014 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Family Court Procedure, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

The December 3, 2014 South Carolina Supreme Court opinion in Buist v. Buist, 410 S.C. 569, 766 S.E.2d 381 (2014), sets forth procedures to be used

Supreme Court completely reverses Court of Appeals and reinstates family court’s alimony, property division and attorney fee award

Posted Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Attorney's Fees, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

The July 2, 2014 Supreme Court opinion in Crossland v. Crossland, 408 S.C. 443, 759 S.E.2d 419 (2014), completely reverses the prior Court of Appeals opinion and

Court of Appeals rules prevailing party shouldn’t have to pay the other side’s attorney’s fees

Posted Monday, June 9th, 2014 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

The June 4, 2014 Court of Appeals opinion in Brown v. Brown, 408 S.C. 582, 758 S.E.2d 922 (Ct. App. 2014), reversed a $5,000 attorney fee award the

Court of Appeals finds prenuptial agreement only partially limited family court’s jurisdiction

Posted Wednesday, March 26th, 2014 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Jurisdiction, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

The March 26, 2014 Court of Appeals opinion in Meehan v. Meehan, 407 S.C. 471, 756 S.E.2d 398 (Ct. App. 2014) determined that the Meehans’ prenuptial divested

The potential domestic client who wants the attorney to work on promise of payment

Posted Friday, November 22nd, 2013 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney-Client Relations, Attorney's Fees, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys

The combination of the front loaded nature of contested family court cases (i.e., preparing for motions for temporary relief) and the general reluctance of attorneys

Obtaining funding for an ongoing family court case

Posted Friday, August 9th, 2013 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

Unless one filed a specific request for advance suit costs, at most motions for temporary relief the family court will only award fees (if it

When can a family law attorney be required to pay the other party’s fees?

Posted Thursday, July 25th, 2013 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

A few weeks ago one of my mentees inquired whether there were circumstances in which an attorney could be required to pay the other party’s

Supreme Court alters equitable distribution award and reverses reservation of alimony

Posted Thursday, February 21st, 2013 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Attorney's Fees, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

N.B., on May 8, 2013, the South Carolina Supreme Court slightly modified its original opinion.  For more information read Supreme Court reconsiders equitable distribution of marital

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