“Hammered” by the family court, Court of Appeals hammers Husband again

Posted Saturday, April 16th, 2016 by Gregory Forman
Filed under 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

There are some family court smack-downs that beg for an appeal. And there are some Court of Appeals decisions that beg for a petition for

Husband’s lack of credibility on financial disclosure has multiple adverse consequences

Posted Saturday, March 19th, 2016 by Gregory Forman
Filed under 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 March 16, 2016 Court of Appeals opinion in Conits v. Conits, 417 S.C. 127, 789 S.E.2d 51 (Ct. App. 2016) rejects many of Husband’s allegations of

Court of Appeals affirms custody, property division and fees

Posted Thursday, April 9th, 2015 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Child Custody, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific

Can anyone explain the Court of Appeals’ thought process in what family law decisions it will publish? On April 8, 2015, mere weeks after deigning

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

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