Shouldn’t having custody of a child terminate child support per se?
Posted Friday, May 13th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Support, Jurisprudence, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to General Public
Under S.C. Code § 63-3-530 (17) “orders for child support run until the child is eighteen years of age or until the child is married
What exactly is an “asked and answered” evidentiary objection?
Posted Thursday, May 12th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
Often during trials, opposing counsel will object to a question I pose on cross examination as being “asked and answered.” Too often I will note
A retired family court judge’s view of the import of Lewis v. Lewis
Posted Thursday, May 12th, 2011 by Barry Knobel
Filed under Family Court Procedure, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
From guest blogger, the Formerly Honorable Barry W. Knobel. I jokingly refer to Barry W. Knobel as “formerly honorable” because he stepped down from the family
Posted Wednesday, May 11th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Rules of Professional (Lawyer) Conduct, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
As someone who has an expansive web site and blog devoted, in part, to marketing my family law practice, I am highly interested in Supreme
Supreme Court authorizes use of SCRCP 60(b)(5) to right obvious injustice
Posted Wednesday, May 11th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Alimony/Spousal Support, Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Family Court Procedure, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The 2006 Court of Appeals opinion in Simmons v. Simmons, 370 S.C. 109, 634 S.E.2d 1 (Ct. App. 2006) voided a provision in the parties’ 1990
Supreme Court engages in scholarly debates on standard of appellate review of family court orders
Posted Wednesday, May 11th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Equitable Distribution/Property Division, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The May 9, 2011 opinion in Lewis v. Lewis, 392 S.C. 381, 709 S.E.2d 650 (2011), finds the South Carolina Supreme Court engaging in a scholarly
“Shotgunning” motions to compel discovery
Posted Friday, May 6th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Family Court Procedure, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys
While the rules of civil procedure don’t create a distinction, there are really two types of motions to compel discovery. The first type of motion
In 3-2 decision, Supreme Court takes narrow view of unwed father’s parental rights
Posted Thursday, May 5th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Adoption/Termination of Parental Rights, Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate Decisions
The creation of parental rights and responsibilities for unwed fathers are hardly reciprocal. The state, the mother, or the child’s guardian can come after an
After Webb v. Sowell is any post eighteenth birthday child support constitutional?
Posted Wednesday, May 4th, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
In 2010, the South Carolina Supreme Court decision in Webb v. Sowell, 387 S.C. 328, 692 S.E.2d 543 (2010) found that South Carolina’s interpretation of
God gave us children so that death wouldn’t be so disappointing?
Posted Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Law and Culture, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to General Public
Walking through the Charleston market today I spotted a t-shirt for sale that read “God gave us children so that death wouldn’t be so disappointing.”
