Posted Tuesday, September 25th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
In South Carolina only adultery acts as an absolute bar to alimony. S.C. Code § 20-3-130(A). Yet, since the implementation of South Carolina’s alimony statute
Can a deserting (without good cause) spouse get alimony?
Posted Friday, September 7th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Legislation, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
How many family law attorneys are aware of S.C. Code § 63-5-20? In my experience not many. With the proper fact pattern that statute might
Equalizing incomes doesn’t always equalize lifestyles
Posted Saturday, August 25th, 2012 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
In setting alimony for really long marriages (30+ years) the family courts sometime try to equalize incomes. In cases in which both parties are retired
Court of Appeals reduces alimony obligation for downsized ex-husband
Posted Thursday, August 16th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
In the August 15, 2012 opinion of Holmes v. Holmes, 399 S.C. 499, 732 S.E.2d 213 (Ct. App. 2012), the Court of Appeals does what the trial
Are you paying too much in weekly support?
Posted Friday, August 10th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Support, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
When translating support from a monthly payment amount to a weekly payment amount, family court attorneys and judges divide the weekly amount by 4 1/3.
New statute codifies law on alimony modification upon retirement
Posted Monday, July 16th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Legislation, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
One of my blog’s readers posted a comment linking a new statute that codifies the law on modifying alimony upon the supporting spouse’s retirement. South
Posted Thursday, May 31st, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Child Support, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants
Typical language in South Carolina support orders is: The obligor shall pay support directly to the obligee. If the obligor is ever more than five
Way decision reverses lump sum equitable distribution award
Posted Wednesday, May 9th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The May 9, 2012 Court of Appeals opinion in Way v. Way, 398 S.C. 1, 726 S.E.2d 215 (Ct. App. 2012), reversed the family court’s $20,000
Crossland appeal offers interesting guidance on alimony and equitable distribution
Posted Wednesday, March 7th, 2012 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
On July 2, 2014 the South Carolina Supreme Court completely reversed this Court of Appeals opinion. See Supreme Court completely reverses Court of Appeals and reinstates
Combining rehabilitative and permanent alimony
Posted Wednesday, February 22nd, 2012 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
For reasons that are only marginally explicable, South Carolina attorneys and judges are reluctant to issue orders or enter agreements that combine rehabilitative alimony with
