Manigault v. Manigault is an unpublished April 2008 opinion from the South Carolina Court of Appeals. In Manigault, I represented a husband who, prior to my representation, failed to show up for trial and was not happy with the result. He retained me to petition the family court to reopen the case based on his confusion regarding the final hearing. The family court agreed to reopen the case and his wife appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the family court’s decision, finding that the family court judge did not abuse her discretion in reopening the case.
In South Carolina family court, is all social media usage discoverable?
In divorce or child custody cases, I personally don’t like issuing broad discovery requests for the opposing party’s social media usage. Until a
Once an attorney makes an appearance, that attorney can be served with the summons and complaint
If I have knowledge that a family law matter has been filed against an existing client, I will often file my notice of
Supreme Court holds Husband’s successive but timely Rule 59(e) motion stayed Wife’s time to appeal
The March 12, 2025, Supreme Court opinion in Swing v. Swing reinstated an appeal that the Court of Appeals had dismissed as untimely.
