South Carolina Specific

What is the burden of proof for adultery divorce in South Carolina?

Posted Thursday, December 9th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

Has anyone else noticed that our South Carolina appellate courts have made a hash out of the burden of proof necessary to obtain a divorce

Why certain women are better off with lump sum alimony versus permanent periodic alimony

Posted Saturday, October 9th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys

I provided a second opinion recently, reviewing a settlement proposal that a divorcing wife was hesitant to execute.  She was married to a high income

Challenging improperly issued ex-parte support orders

Posted Thursday, October 7th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Support, Family Court Procedure, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

In South Carolina most child support or alimony orders in which the support will be paid directly have a standard provision involving late payments.  This

Lessons in imputed income from the Court of Appeals

Posted Wednesday, September 1st, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Attorney's Fees, Child Custody, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

Have some sympathy for Family Court Judge Leslie K. Riddle, whose decision in the case of Marchant v. Marchant, 390 S.C. 1, 699 S.E.2d 708

Court of Appeals opinion clarifies transmutation and adultery’s bar to alimony

Posted Friday, August 6th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

The August 4, 2010 South Carolina Court of Appeals opinion in Pruitt v. Pruitt, 389 S.C. 250, 697 S.E.2d 702 (Ct. App. 2010), covers numerous issues, a

Court of Appeals affirms biased eyewitness testimony insufficient to prove adultery

Posted Wednesday, July 21st, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Divorce and Marriage, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

The July 24, 2010 Court of Appeals opinion in Kennedy v. Kennedy, 389 S.C. 494, 699 S.E.2d 184 (Ct. App. 2010) provides some guidance on proof of adultery,

South Carolina’s bass-ackwards approach to life insurance to secure support payments

Posted Thursday, July 15th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Support, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

South Carolina’s approach to the requirement of life insurance to secure child support or alimony payments could only have been designed by someone with no

When to file a contested marital dissolution action before negotiating and when not to request a temporary hearing when filing a contested family court case

Posted Sunday, July 4th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Custody, Child Support, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Family Court Procedure, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

It is my experience that most family law attorneys in South Carolina reflexively file a motion for temporary relief when filing a contested family court

Financial declarations with an eye toward the future

Posted Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Support, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific

Just the past week I have closed a support modification case in which a party’s financial declaration understates that party’s projected future income and taken

Court of Appeals notes it’s unlikely parents agree to their habitually intoxicated spouse having custody of their children

Posted Friday, May 28th, 2010 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Divorce and Marriage, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

A couple of interesting things are happening in yesterday’s Court of Appeals opinion in Bodkin v. Bodkin, 388 S.C. 203, 694 S.E.2d 230 (2010), which, with one