In 2012 South Carolina amended the alimony modification statute, S.C. Code § 20-3-170(B), to include specific factors for the family court to consider on whether to modify or terminate alimony when a supporting spouse retires. Those factors are:

(1) whether retirement was contemplated when alimony was awarded;
(2) the age of the supporting spouse;
(3) the health of the supporting spouse;
(4) whether the retirement is mandatory or voluntary;
(5) whether retirement would result in a decrease in the supporting spouse’s income; and
(6) any other factors the court sees fit.

This code section, and the case of Smith v. Smith, 359 S.C. 393, 597 S.E.2d 188 (Ct.App.2004), authorize a request to modify or terminate alimony based upon retirement to be brought on a motion in the original case, although Smith suggests “filing a new action for a modification may be preferable.” Certainly when the supporting spouse wishes to develop evidence to support the modification claim, or when factual disputes are likely, a new action is advisable. If the supporting spouse wishes to modify or terminate alimony prior to trial, a motion for temporary relief can always accompany the new action.

As of April 17, 2015, no reported South Carolina cases interpret S.C. Code § 20-3-170(B).

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

Recent Blog Posts

No more remote mediations

A December 6, 2024 Supreme Court order rescinds a March 19, 2021 Supreme Court order that authorized remote mediations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

[ + ] Read More

For second time in under two years, Court of Appeals affirms divided legal custody

The refiled October 21, 2024, Court of Appeals opinion in Abbas-Ghaleb v. Ghaleb, 444 S.C. 245, 907 S.E.2d 105 (Ct. App. 2024), stems

[ + ] Read More

Supreme Court reinstates family court’s change of custody to father and clarifies guardian’s ability to make custody recommendations

The November 20, 2024 Supreme Court opinion in Grungo-Smith v. Grungo, reversed the Court of Appeals ruling in Grungo-Smith v. Grungo, 438 S.C.

[ + ] Read More