Posted Wednesday, July 29th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Law and Culture, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific
It is 216 months from the time a child is born until the time the child turns eighteen. Under South Carolina law the family court
Posted Wednesday, July 29th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Attorney's Fees, Child Custody, Child Support, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
An appeal I handled for a local colleague, Douglas Barker, resulted in a published opinion today (July 29, 2009) from the Court of Appeals in
The pitfalls of cursory standard interrogatory responses
Posted Tuesday, July 28th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Litigation Strategy, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions
The Court of Appeals’ decision to affirm the family court’s award of custody to the father in its July 28, 2009 opinion in Divine v.
Posted Monday, July 13th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Adoption/Termination of Parental Rights, Child Custody, Jurisdiction, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
The July 13, 2009 Court of Appeals decision in Brookshire v. Blackwell, 384 S.C. 333, 682 S.E.2d 295 (Ct.App. 2009) clarifies personal and subject matter jurisdiction analysis as
Supreme Court decision reestablishes deference to family court judges’ credibility findings
Posted Monday, June 15th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
I have been eagerly awaiting today’s [June 15, 2009] South Carolina Supreme Court decision in McCrosson v. Tanenbaum, 383 S.C. 150, 679 S.E.2d 172 (2009). Not only
Court of Appeals renders first published post-Latimer decision on relocation
Posted Friday, June 12th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
Our [South Carolina] Court of Appeals rarely prohibited a parent from relocating with a child (at least in the opinions it published) when our Supreme
Posted Monday, May 11th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Divorce and Marriage, Law and Culture, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to General Public
I spent the dying years of the “second wave feminism” movement living, through a dorm exchange, at Bryn Mawr College, one of the “Seven Sisters”
Correct result, questionable rationale on multi-state child custody jurisdiction appeal
Posted Tuesday, May 5th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
In 2007 South Carolina substituted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA) for the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). S.C. Code Ann.
Posted Friday, April 24th, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Law and Culture, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to General Public
Though I have seen no statistics on the subject, I would estimate that between one-quarter and one-half of all children in America will spend some
Does the term “custody” cause more problems than it solves?
Posted Tuesday, April 21st, 2009 by Gregory Forman
Filed under Child Custody, Jurisprudence, Law and Culture, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public
I am frequently asked by clients or potential clients to explain all the nomenclature that surrounds custody orders: “shared,” “sole,” “joint,” “legal,” “physical,” “primary.” In my view these terms are ill-defined or
